Posted on 05/09/2014 6:19:54 PM PDT by RKBA Democrat
I have concluded that anyone seeking a reasonable discussion and exploration on FR of small-l libertarianism and how it unites millions of Americans of every stripe, and how it has the potential of RESCUING America in coming elections, is better off to simply IGNORE and SKIP comments by the very small handful of rabidly anti-libertarian self-deceiving nuts on FR. Otherwise the discussion deteriorates into trying to reason with a hysterical woman.
There seems to be a hang-up/mental block, among a few, on certain definitions of libertarian and even conservative.
Party platforms and modern dictionaries don’t necessarily help as they attempt to “define” those that reject being defined in their terms.
The few, that you addressed earlier, seem hell bent on defining small-l libertarians as being blind followers of some “Party Platform” that most have never read and certainly don’t agree with.
Our country was built by Liberals. Liberals in the classical sense. Conservatives, Constitutionalists and God fearing Individuals were once called Liberal.
Sadly, there are conservatives that find the need to “define” and “group” some like minded individuals based not on the individual, but on their understanding of what that “Group” represents.
There is a difference between an ideology and the politics. An ideology is the “what”, while the politics is the “How”.
The Tea Party represents the “what” while we currently use the Republican Party as the “How”.
IMHO, this debate or battle among ourselves comes down to faith. Faith in our fellow man. You either trust individuals to make decisions that are in their best interest or you place your trust in Government to force those decisions. Unfortunately, we have a Government and virtually every public institution that is “forcing” us to accept immorality by the force of law and peer-pressure. Conversely, we can’t use the force of Government to legislate morality. All we can do is remove the Government from these issues and then trust people as individuals to act according to their conscious.
Having “Faith” in our fellow man has become increasingly more difficult as certain small “groups” have sought and found protection from our Government. I think small-l libertarians are seeking to remove that protection. At least I am.
Our faith in our fellow man also requires a common foundation of belief that every person has, but all too many ignore.
Logically, I can’t help but to boil this down to a Creation/Evolution debate. I can’t escape this.
It’s sad. Frankly, I’m not a libertarian. But am certainly sympathetic on a host of issues. It would be nice to discuss without a vitriolic harangue. How bout a standard disclaimer:
This is a thread that discusses libertarians and/or libertarianism. Comments are welcome and appreciated, however i politely request that you PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!
Unfortunately, there are a handful of FReepers who view it as their personal crusade to slander and insult anything associated with libertarianism. They are of course free to voice their opinion in accordance with the site rules. However, be aware that they’re not interested in calm or reasoned debate. You’re wasting your time and clogging the thread by responding to them. PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!
I don’t think it’s any more cut and dried than being a republican, democrat, conservative or liberal. Actually, liberals fall more into the mindset you described than any libertarians I personally know. Most libertarians I know do want a strong national defense, they simply don’t want to be nation builders and perpetual occupiers. As far as social issues, that varies from person to person, some being extremely conservative, some believing each person should answer their own conscience. I don’t know any who thinks every thing or any thing a person chooses to do is OK, or that morality is a non-issue. Quite the opposite.
To say every libertarian is identical to every other one, and none of them have a conservative position on any issue is indeed the same as saying that anyone who opposes obama is a racist.
Math and counting relaxes me and also informs me as to the real picture when it comes to forums. This is true in all media, whether it's the MSM or advertising or pop culture -- truly, the projected image is often very different than the on-the-ground reality.
I believe in my fellow Americans because I listen to them and crunch numbers, and know that in spite of the MSM and election results (fraud is rampant), nearly two in three legit Americans (legal, working, productive, decent) lean decidedly to the right and toward limited government. One in three leans the other way, but that one in three's voice is amplified and morally supported tenfold via a stilted MSM and confirmed when ginned and manufactured votes tip the balance toward guys like Franken, Reid, and Pelosi in elected power of office. Government is solely a force. Nothing more, nothing less. It is solely a FORCE, "a dangerous servant" as Washington said, and therefore should be used SPARINGLY.
Anyway, for what it's worth, and I hope many lurkers and potential donors to the FReepathon take note, and please donate what you can because in spite of appearances, it is a very worthwhile forum where YOU are probably in kindred company in spite of the appearances and "greeting":
There are, if my reckoning is right, 35 voices on this thread. Five of them are heartily opposed to libertarian principle. Thirteen of them are comfortable with libertarian principle, if not self-described libertarians. Seventeen are too vague in their posts for me to determine, but I err on the side of caution. For example, one of them posted a troll alert, but that was to the author of the thread (you!) so who knows if the warning was meant to indicate that YOU were the troll, or if the individual who authored nearly one of every three posts was the "troll" referenced. It's not clear to me, so I err on the side of caution.
71 of 224 posts -- very nearly one of every three posts -- is by one individual. Terms used to "debate" the issue include:
Libertarians, “”give me full term abortion, gay marriage, crack and hookers, weak nation defense, and open borders today ..."
If you don’t know what the libertarian position on child porn is, perhaps one of your fellow libertarians knows....
... and the supremely oxymoronic The libertarian argument is in favor of gay equality, oxymoronic (emphasis on the third and fourth syllables) because libertarian principle quite simply enables free individuals to decide whether they want to recognize a homosexual relationship or not, because the very idea of "equality" regarding homosexuality is an illusion, like outlawing homosexual marriages is like outlawing unicorns!!!
I see such an argument as being akin to bearing false witness, so this is not only supremely oxymoronic, it is supremely ironic because the argument bears false witness to support someone who is claiming to be MORE moral than his opponents!
Anyway ... just sayin'. I hope folks contribute to the FReepathon and understand that the overbearing ugliness and insult here over-represents a slim minority. Most good and righteous compatriots understand the importance of libertarian principle in the quest for a more moral and righteous America.
Incidentally, here's what Ted Cruz thinks of "libertarian." Somebody needs to re-think a tagline.
Damn you are an idiot. And what pray tell makes you believe that I do not know their position? I already answered this twice for you, but since you are too lazy to even check previous posts in this thread, here goes:
Illegal Immigration: I am opposed to it. I do not believe in open borders. There are many reasons for this; security being one of the main reasons. I have no problem with legal immigration and it should continue, though the entire immigration system needs reformed. And no, I am not advocating for amnesty, just in case you were going to try to put those words into my mouth.
The party’s position is unfettered open borders. There, I put it all together for you in one post so you don’t have to think too hard. By the way, you do understand that my position is different from the Party’s right?
I think you are asking idiotic questions and being purposefully obtuse because you are really a liberal at heart and you know that I have basically handed you your a$$ in this exchange.
So you are proposing hanging them? And you call ME a leftist! Wow! How delusional are you?
I don’t know why you keep switching from immigration to illegal immigration, but here is the libertarian position on immigration, in it’s complete text.
COMPLETE PLATFORM TEXT
INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND CIVIL ORDER
IMMIGRATION:
“”THE ISSUE: We welcome all refugees to our country and condemn the efforts of U.S. officials to create a new “Berlin Wall” which would keep them captive. We condemn the U.S. government’s policy of barring those refugees from our country and preventing Americans from assisting their passage to help them escape tyranny or improve their economic prospects.
THE PRINCIPLE: We hold that human rights should not be denied or abridged on the basis of nationality. Undocumented non-citizens should not be denied the fundamental freedom to labor and to move about unmolested. Furthermore, immigration must not be restricted for reasons of race, religion, political creed, age or sexual preference. We oppose government welfare and resettlement payments to non-citizens just as we oppose government welfare payments to all other persons.
SOLUTIONS: We condemn massive roundups of Hispanic Americans and others by the federal government in its hunt for individuals not possessing required government documents. We strongly oppose all measures that punish employers who hire undocumented workers. Such measures repress free enterprise, harass workers, and systematically discourage employers from hiring Hispanics.
TRANSITIONAL ACTION: We call for the elimination of all restrictions on immigration, the abolition of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Border Patrol, and a declaration of full amnesty for all people who have entered the country illegally.””
What a silly claim, there is no big l, little l libertarianism, and it's leftist positions on social issues and abortion and marriage, are not "personal freedoms", and it IS part of the left's opposition to conservatism.
Care to explain the ridiculous claim you made in support of Obama's positions on homosexual issues where you claim that opposing gay marriage and gays in the military requires bigger government and ""to monitor and meddle in peoples’ lives, finances, church attendance, other nations’ internal affairs & external, etc.""?
No one has said anything like you claimed, yet you keep repeating it, libertarian is an ism opposed to conservatism, and which at this point is joined with rinoism, to move the GOP left on many issues, such as the social issues.
If one tells us he is libertarian we know what that means, and we know that means he rejects conservatism, and opposes it.
You said that you agree with me, but then refused to respond to post 118.
Do you agree with me?
What military was that? It wasn't the American, where our wives and girlfriends, and sex drenched teens and 20 somethings are everywhere, and every weekend night was about searching for sex, even in the EM club and soldiers can date each other.
While you are looking for that military, would you also find the quotes making me a "statist" or the one about wanting to "hang" homosexuals, or perhaps the source that told you that George Washington hanged homosexuals?
You label centuries of military exclusion of homosexuals ""statist"" and ""witch hunts"", conservatives would like for you to explain that.
When you were asked not to stalk, that probably included not making all of your posts about me, attacking me, and attacking my posts.
And Ted Cruz is no libertarian, and is making the very same fight that I, other conservatives, and freerepublic support, including for marriage, he is no Rand Paul.
I notice you’re still posting the same lying and venomous garbage I last called you out on over a year ago. Lying slugs never do change, no matter how much their lies, halftruths and innuendoes are refuted with truth, debunked with actual FACTS or simply proven false, even libellous, with links to source documhents, original quotes and other TRUTHS available from many sources.
Happy to see me again?
You are not a conservative, actually you sound like a closet homo, being that tou seem to be so obsessed with it.
It was the American military. I do not know where you served, but fraternization and sex on duty were illegal then and they are now. Are you denying that fact? if you are then you arenot even informed enough to have an opinion on this issue.
I call you statist because I have no issue with gays in the military as long as they serve with dignity, are not open, and meet all of the same standards the rest of the military does. You would kick them out because they partake in behavior off duty that you don’t like. That is what makes you a statist.
No libertarian would suggest that, only a “progressive” pervert. Libertarians who are SERIOUS realize that sex with a child is an act of aggression, as the child is incapable of giving informed consent. So chalk up another lie from you. How different, eh? How surprising that you are so insecure in your beliefs you have to lie about others. NOT!!!
FOR THE LAST TIME.... I favor open LEGAL immigration based on the needs of the country, etc. I am against illegal immigration. which is not the Party position.
I am done with this conversation as we are just going in circles.
I don't know who are, was that a stalking message?
Like so many of your posts, it’s hard to know what you are talking about.
You label someone who is conservative and trying to persuade you to be conservative, as “not a conservative”.
You say that you are OK with gays serving in the military and defend it by saying that everyone’s sexuality is hidden in the military. “”When I served, outward sexuality was forbidden.””, no you say that means they are aren’t allowed to have sex on duty, well that never came up, nor does it have any relevance, it is like you keep commenting on illegal immigration, when the actual topic is “immigration”, another thing you support, and you didn’t seem to blanch at the libertarian position on it, when if would shock a conservative.
You also explain that being against homosexuality in the military is “statist” and that makes me and conservatives, and freerepublic, and America until Obama, “statists”.
Should the military recognize their marriages?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.