Apparently, you retread libertrollians have absolutely no regard for private property rights. Zot!
Funny how "having absolutely no regard for private property rights" doesn't count against the many known sneakback retreads who are allowed to remain, as long as they agree with the designated "party line" on certain issues. Some animals turn out to be more equal than others.
See also post #41.
Jim, you are of course free to run this forum any way you choose, but I submit that certain kinds of choices are not good for the health and reputation of the forum, and that the effects are already being felt in many ways, including how it is taking longer and longer for the quarterly Freepathons to meet their goals.
The f-word ("fundie") is always a favorite insult of leftists, and it always makes me bristle when someone on (in the broadest sesne) "our" side uses it. To use the phrase at all is always a red flag for me.
I'm more of a a small-l libertarian than a social conservative, but I do not get at all this concept that the two points of view are somehow inimical.
How does being a social conservative mean that you favor a "nanny state"? I don't know of ANYONE that I would consider a social conservative--other than the numerically insiginificant "crunchy cons"--who isn't also a small-government advocate.
It's the social conservatives, for example, who are in the forefront of homeschooling and the revolution against the education bureaucracy.
And any libertarian who supports the grotesque expansion of judicial fiat power that is Roe v. Wade is a HYPOCRITE, whatever his views on abortion are. Roe v. Wade is an abomination on the law, and it should be a natural point of agreement between libertarians and social conservatives.
There are many more examples. In short, anyone who thinks that libertarianism and social conservatives are in direct oppostion to each other is either naive or is deliberately trying to sabotage things.
LOL! IATZ.