Posted on 03/26/2002 7:30:11 AM PST by The Old Hoosier
I'm tired of your evasive tactics of attack, attack, attack in an effort to draw attention away from the fact that you've never answered the initial question that was posed when you attacked my first post.
I actually first read their threads thinking they were these "super" conservatives based on the LIBERTARIAN name. My mouth dropped as I read their posts. To say I was shocked by them would be an understatement.
So I read and formed my opinion after reading Libertarian posters. I started with being impressed by them by their name and my opinion of them dropped as I read what they thought about different topics. Morally most of them remind me of Bill Clinton! IMO
Have a good day, I have to leave to eat fulfill my current obligations.
Selective Draft Law Cases, 245 U.S. 366 (1918). The Court's analysis, in full, of the Thirteenth Amendment issue raised by a compulsory military draft was the following: ''As we are unable to conceive upon what theory the exaction by government from the citizen of the performance of his supreme and noble duty of contributing to the defense of the rights and honor of the nation, as the result of a war declared by the great representative body of the people, can be said to be the imposition of involuntary servitude in violation of the prohibitions of the Thirteenth Amendment, we are constrained to the conclusion that the contention to that effect is refuted by its mere statement.''
Chattel slavery may be permissible in Somalia or a piece of Rand pulp fiction. It's illegal here in America.
Kinda like Scientology.
As you can see on this thread, Libertarian zealots have little difficulty rationalizing the reinstitution of chattel slavery based upon their whims.
First of all lets look at history.
If there was anytime that small "l" libertarianism was in the forefront of political power it was at the time of the writing and approval of the Constitution. George Mason and P. Henry, the most promenant amongst the Anti-Federalists published countless papers about the preservation of rights in the new draft.
Mason left the Convention at its end and didn't return to sign the document for two reasons. The first was slavery, an institution he despised and didn't want to see extended in the new repbulic (despite having been a slave owner). The second was disgust that the time wouldn't be taken to write in a Bill of Rights prior to the issuance of the Constitution.
When Madison, using Mason's Declaration of Rights for Virginaia, later authored and introduced a bill of rights, Mason was asked if he was now content. He answered that it wasn't extensive enough and perhaps it should have had about thirteen instead of the final ten.
Just prior to his death he was more charitable as to what he and his fellows had acomplished but the contribution of the Anti-Federalists helped produce a better republic.
Now, as that has been one of the closest instances of Libertarian political power in action, I think it absurb to contend that today's libertarian philosophy wouldn't have produced the Amendments utilized in outlawing slavery, because they wanted such in there to begin with as shown by the actual record.
I have many times found myself on the opposite side of the arguement from you but in this case no one has laid a glove on you.
If a poster wants to contend that libertarians rely too heavily on a society based on Contract....make that arguement, cite the examples and I might even agree. But to slam libertarians for something they historically, the one time they were a potent force, tried to prevent is ridiculous.
I don't feel that I will ever understand libertarians. But that is my deficiency, not from their lack of trying, LOL.
Basically, your point is that your understanding of their current philosophy is that it would excuse contractural relationships like slavery?
If so, please post an example of where that extensive a view is espoused rather that trying to extrapolate their general statements to some end claim of your own.
All rights are inextricably linked with property rights. Such rights as the freedom from involuntary servitude as well as the freedom of speech and the freedom of press are based on self-ownership. Our bodies are our property every bit as much as is justly acquired land or material objects.We further hold that the owners of property have the full right to control, use, dispose of, or in any manner enjoy, their property without interference, until and unless the exercise of their control infringes the valid rights of others.
1994 National Platform of the Libertarian Party
Adopted in Convention, September 1993, Salt Lake City, Utah
How many civil wars do you want?
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.