Your strawman attempt to equate libertarianism with anarchy proves you don't. Or you do, but are unable to refute it without being intellectually dishonest.
a system that allowed the most freedoms in a framework where the morality was maintained by Judeo-Christian religion and anarchy and license were held in check by a populace that willing controlled their behavior so that others wouldn’t demand a strong government to do so.
And apparently, you would be first in line to demand a strong government to control people doing things you think are wrong. This is the difference between a libertarian and a statist like yourself: a libertarian wanting to change a person's behavior would do it with logic and rhetoric, not through government force. I am personally one of the most socially conservative people you could find. And, I would love for everyone to have my same morals and ethics and beliefs. But they must do so of their own volition; not out of fear of violation of the state.
There is a difference between a “strawman argument” (one of the top 10 most overused and misused terms on the Internet) and the concept of logical extremes.
The ideology of libertarianism means that one group cannot impose a set of restrictions on another. You may deny it, but that is at its core.
Once that core is established, there are no restrictions. An absence of restrictions is a form of anarchy.
That is the logical extremes of the liberaltarians.
I’ve stated my case. It is airtight and logical and commits no fallacies.
I have also described the critical divide between conservatives and libertarians and why I will never vote for a libertarian and why, though we are united in our fight against big government, we are essentially and critically opposed to one another.
And speaking of strawman arguments, you committed a nice one in this post yourself.
I already stated that I do not want a strong central government dictating behavior. You then erected my alleged desire for just that to attack.
Just to reiterate so those that are not as attuned to logical fallacies will not be fooled by your illogic, here is what I stated.
A group of people comes together. They agree on a certain set of rules that they all live by. The establish a government that enforces those rules and no more. This enables them to live in complete freedom as long as they are within that set of rules. As long as this followed, no stronger government is necessary other than that which enforces the rules that have been agreed to. This is what our Founding Fathers established with the US Constitution. This is what has been abandoned throughout the 20th centuries. The abandonment was put into effect mainly by people hostile to the US Constitution, either because they wanted no restrictions or wanted to tear it down so that they would have the power to enforce whatever restrictions they desired.
Conservatives want to return to what our Founding Fathers established.