Posted on 10/01/2013 12:06:37 PM PDT by shego
For better or for worse, libertarianism is on the upswing in the Republican Party....
...."68% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents agree with the statement that 'individuals should be free to do as they like as long as they don't hurt others, and that the government should keep out of people's day-to-day lives.'....
"Some fundamentalist Christians are very libertarian in their beliefs," explained Dave Nalle, Chairman of the Republican Liberty Caucus, to The Washington Times Communities earlier this year....
"They understand that the governmental restraint which is central to libertarianism works to their benefit in protecting them from government interference in their religious life," he continued. "Like Ron Paul, who is very religious, they value the independence of their churches and want to keep government from promoting any ideology through the schools or its other programs. While they do not support social libertarianism they understand that if government can dictate lifestyle decisions it's a knife which cuts both ways."
During the same interview, Nalle mentioned that "(w)here we do run into problems with the religious right is with those small but influential groups which believe that they should promote their beliefs by using government as an instrument to impose them on other people.
"They don't understand that this is a terrible practice which can be turned against them and they use tactics which are essentially the same as the secular humanists from the left who are their greatest enemies. Ultimately I don't see much future for this element in the Republican Party or even in mainstream politics.
"When they are fanatical about forcing their beliefs on everyone through legislation they make themselves so unpopular that they become a political liability which no party can afford to get involved with...
(Excerpt) Read more at communities.washingtontimes.com ...
I apologize for my faux pas.
I took your response to ansel12 (courtesy ping) as indicating that you were lining up with the secularist libertarians against his alleged "theocratic" tendencies.
Now let me make it plain that I do not agree with ansel12's religious beliefs and I have had my tangles with him. However, one day the entire world will be a true Theocracy, just as ancient Israel was. This should be our goal and we should proceed with this in mind. We should not be reflexively defending eighteenth century political or economic views because this is good for the "private" nature of religion. Religion is not private. It was certainly far from private in ancient Israel under the authentic Torah form of government.
I am not arguing for or apologizing for "chrstian world rule" or even "chrstian rule" of the USA, but we've all got to stop this reflexive fear of the "legislation of morality." Yes, their moral standards are deficient and will remain so until they acknowledge the Torah and the Sages. But while we wait for Mashiach, let's begin to work for basic Noachide morality, where feasible, at local and state levels. And again, yes, I know that the bodies which alone have the right to enforce Noachide Halakhah are not yet in existence. But we can certainly prepare for them rather than merely hiding in Tom Paine's pocket till Mashiach gets here.
I mentioned a week or so ago that I am by nature and inclination a "build the Temple NOW!" kinda guy who is trying to submit his enthusiasm to the genuine rulings of the Sages. One way of "building the Temple" is the spreading of Noachide morality, and this is something which libertarianism opposes.
I apologize if I misunderstood your initial post. Unfortunately, misunderstanding seems to run rampant on Internet forums.
PING
May Y-w-h bless your soul!
Pro borders, Pro life, Anti welfare and support your own nasty habits with your earned resources. THAT is where I’m coming from!
you mean like hiding behind a screen name? LOL
Besides, I was responding to a polite poster directly. Anyone else was free to participate, or not.
Are you serious?
I was describing Mitt Romney, as far as rino/libertarinas wanting to win presidential elections, since when?
Ford, HW Bush, Dole, McCain, Romney.
Romney had been running for 20 years and had won a single election, he had to give up his plans for reelection and left that office with 34% approval, lost to McCain, and then was the 2012 candidate.
No, seriously, where do you find “social only conservatives” taking on libertarians, where does one find those two teams battling it out?
I see conservatives taking on libertarians at freerepublic, but I don’t know where you find those pitched battles of “social only conservatives” taking on libertarians.
So, you were referring to Romney. His defects did not extend to being expressly pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage. If he had been, he would not have been nominated.
You disagree so strongly with the conservative politics and positions here, things like abortion, gays in the military gay marriage, open borders etc?
Why not defend your position on homosexual equality in the military?
and you think that is my agenda ""That actually seems to be your agenda.""
Very convincing.
Huh? Since I have barely if ever discussed theology here and probably never, since I don't do theology, what "religious beliefs" are you disagreeing with?
Then you go into something about a "Theocracy" which is absurd to connect to me as ridiculous as the idea is anyway.
It sounds like something foreigners do, not Americans, and almost 400 years ago my family was helping to establish that reality here.
How in the world does theocracy come into a discussion about trying to turn back 50 years of leftist/libertarian gains? Fifty years ago was the 1960s not exactly a theocracy.
I posted this to you, it is absolute fact.
“”The GOP just ran a pro-abortion, pro gay military candidate who opposed the GOP pro-life platform and ran pro-choice ads in at least two states, one being Ohio (which the GOP lost) and you dont think they are winning their true agenda, social liberalism?””
Evidently Romney was a different man, campaigning on a different agenda, a more libertarian agenda than you were aware of.
What a weak little act, you know very well the guidelines here.
Besides, just try to stay on the discussion.
I’ll tell you that if Christian conservatives leave the GOP, then the GOP is finished forever.
Determined to avoid offending anyone, Romney barely had a campaign message and cannot fairly be called a genuinely libertarian candidate in that he could not muster adequate political conviction for such a role. Romney was more in the line of old style GOP country club Republicans, believing that, by golly, having education, intelligence, and success in business, he sure would be a swell President.
I don’t know what your posts about Romney are trying to say, no one called him a genuinely libertarian candidate, I just pointed out how libertarian he was on issues like abortion and homosexual issues.
Romney was not afraid to offend about the issues that truly meant much to him, such as abortion, homosexualizing the military and Boy Scouts, calling Reagan “admantly pro-choice” for years, and other such things.
Something that Romney really had in common with libertarians was that he hated conservatives and conservatism, despised them, and was devoted to destroying them.
I do not recall that from the campaign. I was busy on state House campaigns at the time.
I saw Romney as more of a chameleon than anything else, a wealthy corporate numbers guy eager for success in politics and without strong moorings.
There were issues that Romney wouldn’t drop, he never renounced his almost 20 year goal to homosexualize the military, or his support for homosexual Boy Scout leaders, and during the campaign he returned to his pro-abortion stance, coming out against the GOP pro-life platform and supporting the “health of the mother” pro-abortion position that the left/libertarians used against us so effectively in the 1960s and early 1970s but which today everyone recognizes as abortion on demand, he also defended Romney/Obamacare and other things.
Romney was not a total chameleon on the issues that he held dear, many were shocked to see him restating his old positions after he won the nomination, for instance his return to abortion came after he won the primary, not during.
You’re obviously spoiling for a fight - it’s your reputation. Obviously the conservatives who clash with libertarians in the most likely scenario are the social only conservatives, or social focused conservatives, because thats the area of biggest disagreement between conservatives and libertarians. Duh.....
I wasn’t making any kind of value judgement on that, just making an observation. Your obsession to start a fight is tiring.
When will you understand that I’m pro life and pro border? I have never supported abortion. I have never supported open borders. I believe in the clear and demonstrated superiority of Christian, Western culture. This makes about the twentieth time I have told you, and reading my posting history will confirm those stances. Furthermore, I believe in an omnipotent God who doesn’t need the government or a bunch of judgmental busybodies like you to enforce His rules.
As an example, God MAY be allowing our military to be filled with sodomites to weaken it for His chosen reason. God could be sending Christians a message to leave the US military before it is turned against His people. Did you ever consider that? Maybe the US military has become an Idol in the hearts of too many, trusting in the might of our hardware instead if His Divine Protection. I don’t know, and you don’t know either.
As a matter of fact, if you do believe God is too small to do His own morality enforcement, you are denying His power is sufficient and are by definition committing blasphemy.
Don’t come back to me with some non sequitur accusation of me supporting things I have vehemently opposed many times in this forum. Not only is it tiresome, it makes you look like an idiot.
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.