A Clever Example of Tax Avoidance, but a Quandary for Leftists and Social Conservatives

Since today’s topic is homosexuality, tell us where libertarianism is in opposition to this libertarian position.

1.3 Personal Relationships (libertarian) [...gay rights rant from LPUSA]

Once again, independent libertarians, in general, at least the millions of us who aren't members of the LPUSA (due in large part to some of the platform issues you have cited) are neither in a position of opposition or advocacy of homosexuality.

You see, that is where what's called tolerance comes in— when people who believe in freedom as a governing principle don't believe in controlling others' lifestyle choices. The consensual behavior of gays is not a place for government.

An expansive vision of freedom includes cases where an individual, such as you or I, might not like the particular manner in which another person decides to pursue their happiness, but we are still willing to tolerate their choices, just as we should expect them to tolerate ours. After all, in the absence of infringing on another's rights, if the state (or some democratic majority) gets to determine how an individual can enjoy Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, it essentially negates the entire concept of such an unalienable right, doesn't it?

To try to brand libertarian-leaning conservatives as endorsing some sort of advocacy for the destructive lifestyle of homosexuality, is, once again, an issue to take up with the LPUSA, not the millions of us who have no interest in either promoting or criminalizing the behavior of gays. Tolerating the gay lifestyle does not conflate to believing in gay marriage, any more than believing in secure borders conflates to being anti-immigrant.

There are two kinds of Libertarian, those who believe strongly in private property, and those who do not. And there are authoritarian conservatives, and individualist conservatives. If you want to discuss the differences, you have to define who you are talking about with more precisions than “Libertarian” and “Conservative”.

It would be nice if all the “smaller government” people could deal with the “big” problem first, and then deal with their differences.

It sounds like you agree with this, true libertarians do of course.

“Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government’s treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships.”

It sounds like you agree with this, true libertarians do of course.

Yawn. Wrong. Marriage, child custody, and adoption are not Natural Rights, and your assertion that "true libertarians do" agree with that is once again failing to separate the LPUSA party platform from its members, as well as libertarian independents who are NOT members of the LPUSA.

I'm sure there are many Republican Party members who have strong disagreements with various planks of their party's platform. I've heard exactly such sentiments on this very board. You're trying to conflate the LPUSA with libertarians in general. There are far more libertarians than those who are members of, or endorse the entire platform of, the LPUSA.

The libertarian’s party is not an all encompassing real life national party representing half of America, it is designed to put the libertarian philosophy into political reality, that is why it never is at odds with libertarianism, it is tiny, and precise and exacting.

In your case you agree with conservatives that the federal and other governments SHOULD discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity in areas such as military service and widow benefits and immigration laws, and you think that is libertarianism?

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.