I think I am a Libertarian

Status
Not open for further replies.
scurtis_34471 said:
The government should not enforce the dictates of a particular religious morality. Nor should it arbitrarily attribute rights and privileges to some groups while withholding them from others.
Click to expand...
+1

I love all of these arguments about whether or not we should teach evolution or intelligent design, or whether gays should be allowed to marry, or if we should have "In God We Trust" on our currency, and mention god in our pledge.

*** people. Separation of Church and state! Plain and simple! Yes, we were founded on prodistant values, but one of those basic values was freedom of religon! Why the bias? I think its just downright unfair. Religon is one of those things that needs to be taught by the parents. I remember once when I was a young child in gradeschool, I was asked my religon, and I answered Christian. Later, I asked my parents to verify my answer, and they said that they didn't have a religon. I didn't even know that was possible, and I was very upset. I thought it was unfair that I didn't have a religon, but all the other kids at school did, when I didn't even know what it was. (Although none of the actual "christians" could tell me what it meant either, other than they go to church, which is another topic of discussion) I was convinced I was something less because I wasn't christian, which to me, is pretty f-ed up. That says something about how our school system works nowadays (I went to public school by the way).

Sorry about the rant. Something just flips on inside of me when I see hipocracy.
 
When I will get back I will post some books that suggest that the Founding Fathers were not all Christians and decided to appease this group simply for the fact it would make the transition easier for the Fledgling US government.
 
Remember, there's a difference between being a "libertarian" and a "Libertarian". I claim to be one (lower case "L") but not the latter.

I, like many others here, believe that a wide range of personal freedoms combined with a limited amount of government involvement is the best key to making things "better". Unfortunately I'm not sure if the Libertarian party will ever be poised to make that happen.
 
On the smallest political quiz, I came up as a Libertarian.

On the Political Compass, I came up as being left 3.5 on the economic scale and leaned Social Libertarian by about 2.77. I just want the government out of my private life, and to stop telling me how to raise my children.

On the abortion issue, I feel that abortion is only right when it endangers the mother or if it is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the child will be mentally retarded(the reason being is that I would never want to make that choice, so I won't make it for someone else).

I feel that a zygote, fetus, whatever you feel like calling the baby, is inherently human from the moment of conception and will (if no complications arise) develop into a normal, self-sustaining person. I believe they have a right to life, as I don't exactly like the idea that my mother could have aborted me if she felt like it. I feel that because an unborn child is inherently human and should have rights, then a woman's right over her body ends when it infringes on the right of the unborn child. These are my feelings on the issue, so please don't flame me.

On the gay issue, what you do in your bedroom is between you, your partner, and God. It's not for me to judge others, except those in the Christian faith.
"For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. 'Purge the evil person from among you.'" -1 Corinthians 5:12-13
 
The LP's biggest problem is that they almost take pride in being viewed as a bunch of kooks. Afterall, look at their nominees for POTUS. Michael Badnarik is a good example. In that sense, they resemble a frat party dressing up for a kegger, i.e., no one takes them seriously.
Click to expand...

Just curious, what do you think makes Badnarik look like a "kook"? I've met the guy and spent a couple days talking with him. He seemed to me to be a pretty normal guy, just tired of the government telling him, and everyone, how to live their lives. Of course, maybe I'm a "kook" too so I just can't see it. Oh well, I've been called worse.

Can't say I know of any other pres. candidates that would ever be willing to go to a backwoods shooting range with a bunch of people they didn't know real well, with no personal bodyguards; and proceed to teach newbies the fundamentals of firearms. That was a fun day at the range.
 
I used to consider myself a liberal...until I got a definition for a Libertarian and then realized holy crap I am not some leftist liberal at all. I see the need for some government intervention but overall get the hell out of my home. I think the thing that scares most people about the Libertarian point of view is that it requires some sor of PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY for all of your actions. As for the abortion and gay rights honestly what you do in your freetime is your business and I wont tell you what to do with it until you get in my way or bother me with it.


I do believe however that LIbertarians will never take real control, what needs to be done with the party is to infiltrate the Democrats and Republicans.
 
what needs to be done with the party is to infiltrate the Democrats and Republicans.
Click to expand...

Actually, I know of some people who are doing/have done that. Not to mention Ron Paul is pretty libertarian, but he gets the votes running as a Rep. There's libertarians that want to run, in some places they must run as independents and in others must be Rep. or Dem. So they get on the ballot as Reps and Dems, lo-and-behold, suddenly they're getting votes.

It's funny and sad at the same time. There are people who have run on a platform, as libertarians, and not gotten many votes at all. By simply calling themselves Republican or Democrat, without really changing their platform, they get all sorts of people to vote for them....
 
First, some moderator biz:

[moderatorHatOn]


We have learned from bitter experience that discussions of abortion, religion and sexual orientation often degenerate into less-than-polite arguments or claims that "my God is better than your God". For this reason, we do not discuss such subjects on THR, and any threads dealing primarily with these subjects will be closed or deleted immediately. Threads which deal with other subjects, but which mention abortion, religion or sexual orientation as a side issue, may be allowed to continue, but will be closely scrutinized, and closed or deleted if they "cross the line".


So far, not too shabby, but keep the thread on track.

[/moderatorHatOff]

A couple of thoughts.


"I think I'm a libertarian"

Excellent! So am I! Congratulations!

The difficult question is what best to do about it, and that takes some thought and study.

Part of that thought and study is determining which flavor of libertarian you are. There are many flavors, ranging from "Liberty Oriented Minarchist" to "Free Market Anarchist".

The other part is figuring out how to best champion your libertarian values in the sphere of politics. Sadly, the four main offerings are currently poor:


*The Libertarian party is comically inneffective, and couldn't politic their way out of a paper bag.

* The Democrats wouldn't know minarchism if it whacked them on the snout with a newspaper.

* The Republicans can't seem to keep from tripping over their own wedding tackle.

* The greens....bwa ha ha ha ha hah ah ha.
 
I feel that a zygote, fetus, whatever you feel like calling the baby, is inherently human from the moment of conception and will (if no complications arise) develop into a normal, self-sustaining person.
Click to expand...
I'm a little late to the party but I couldn't resist asking what your opinion of something commonly accepted like birth control pills is. Usually they work to prevent ovulation, but sometimes ovulation does happen and the pill instead works in the uterus to prevent implantation, sustained implantation, or delayed transit preventing implantation.

Its quite easy to say life begins at conception, but when you delve into it deeper and look at it from the medical side of what actually can happen with something as socially accepted as birth control bills the issue becomes a bit murky. I don't know if you've considered that or not, but its something to think of if you haven't. I think these comments are still high road and not insulting or too off topic but let me know if you disagree mods. :D

The Libertarian party is comically inneffective, and couldn't politic their way out of a paper bag.
Click to expand...
You know I've thought about this before and I do kind of understand why. The core values of the people that make up the party seem to select the type of people that don't organize well. I wonder how much of the viability of the libertarian party is linked to the way a political party must operate today versus years past.
 
I'm a little late to the party but I couldn't resist asking what your opinion of something commonly accepted like birth control pills is. Usually they work to prevent ovulation, but sometimes ovulation does happen and the pill instead works in the uterus to prevent implantation, sustained implantation, or delayed transit preventing implantation.
Click to expand...


Well, I guess you're right in that's where it gets murky. I'm not too sure right now where I stand on that. I'm assuming that you mean implantation of the zygote into the (insert technical body part).

I personally accept birth control as a viable means of preventing birth, because it would irresponsible for some to have children (although, I guess that argument could be used to support abortion). For me, it would be irresponsible to have another child, so my wife's getting an IUD at her 6-week checkup.

I'm hopeful that preventing implantation is a rare occasion, as the IUD supposedly prevents eggs from really even forming. I don't know exactly how it works yet, so you'll have to forgive my ignorance. I'm willing to change my mind to an extent on abortion.

I think these comments are still high road and not insulting
Click to expand...

They were completely High Road to me.
 
The fundamental problem with the Libertarian Party is that they are so disorganized and anarchistic that they have trouble getting anything done. I am a hard-core libertarian, but I think the best way for me to effect change is to become involved in the Republican Party and try to change it from within.
 
The libertarian party has 2 strikes against it currently. The first is awareness, a lot of people don't know they exist or if they do, they don't really understand what they stand for. Maybe they heard that they stand for legalization of marijuana or gay rights or something and wrote them off without really understanding what is behind these issues. The other strike is they are not one of the two parties. There are a lot of people who just go into the poll and vote republican or Democrat and that's it. They feel they've been a [Democrat|Republican] all their life so that's who they vote for no matter what.

Then there are the people who feel they will "Throw their vote away" and let someone they really hate in. I can understand this especially when the third party candidates haven't been well represented. However, the reason we still have just a two party system is because people don't want to change.

While I don't necessarily agree with all of the Libertarian views, I agree more with the Libertarians than the Republicans or Democrats. If Ron Paul runs, I know he will get my vote but unfortunately I don't think he will make it past the republican primaries because the primaries tend to ensure we get either the far right or far left. Remember, it's better to declare yourself a Democrat or republican so you can vote in the primaries. And as the election aproaches, get out and start spreading the word about the libertarian party, just don't start out by saying "The libertarians..." Instead, start talking about ideas and if the person you are talking to is agreeing with you, then say something like "Maybe you should check out the libertarian party."
 
Hey, welcome to the party :neener:

I voted Libertarian for our last president. Considering how close the election came out I probably should have went Republican, but I gotta be true to myself, you know?

I consider myself libertarian with a lowercase "l". There are some hardcore ones who want to privatize everything, such as the highway system and turn the national parks over to private ownership too. Sorry, I kind of like the highway system and think we have a lot of national treasures that need to be preserved for everyone to enjoy.

Anyone ever read "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" by Heinlein? If not, do so (and put up with the pigeon english, it's worth it) and then you'll be libertarian :)
 
I used to consider myself a liberal...until I got a definition for a Libertarian
Click to expand...

That's funny, I used to consider myself a conservative.

When you worry about "wasting your vote," consider why you are voting at all. And just ask yourself, what would Edmund Burke have to say?

No one could make a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little.
Click to expand...

Have you all watched www.freedomtofascism.com ? Pretty relevant to small-government ideals. (also, the full documentary is on Google Video, uploaded by Aaron Russo himself for every American to see.)
 
Any of you "little l" Libertarians ever look at the Constitution Party's platform? I can't say much for their candidates, but personally I find the CP more appealing for "small government and little regulation".
 
I may vote for a Libertarian in 2008. I do feel that it is almost throwing away a vote, but if neither of the other two parties represent me very well, I may as well help to send a signal.
Click to expand...

Voting for the candidate that best represents YOU is the best vote there is!

<---Also a Libertarian in Huntsville. Now, there's 2 of us. :D
 
Any of you "little l" Libertarians ever look at the Constitution Party's platform? I can't say much for their candidates, but personally I find the CP more appealing for "small government and little regulation".
Click to expand...

Yes. And they may be for "small government and little regulation". The problems, at least for "small L" libertarians like myself, includes first off what they do want to regulate. Their position on "pornography" and "HIV" (as well as a couple of others) show that they are far less "libertarian" and far more in line with the "we want freedom....for everyone that thinks just like us". The HIV stance is a thinly camoflaged attack on gays; the pornography position an attempt to push Christian morality on everyone. Another example: "Finally, we also oppose all government "legalization" of euthanasia...". In other words we want to force you to keep Ms. Shivo "alive" because our morality book says it's wrong to "kill" someone. You've got every right to believe that way, but sorry, that's not a party for this libertarian.

The second problem? Well, from a "flawed but brave" (to paraphrase a fellow THR member) gentlemen that I consider to be the spiritual ancestor to many libertarians:

"Some men look at constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, and deem them like the ark of the Covenant, too sacred to be touched. They ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment... laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind... as that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, institutions must advance also, to keep pace with the times.... We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain forever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors." -- Thomas Jefferson

"Can one generation bind another and all others in succession forever? I think not. The Creator has made the earth for the living, not for the dead. Rights and powers can only belong to persons, not to things, not to mere matter unendowed with will."
--Thomas Jefferson

Our constitution is an incredible document, scribed by incredible men; but it is not liberty, merely a document that attempts to protect liberty. Given the choice between hailing "liberty" or a document, I would choose liberty, as well as having some concerns about those who would place the document first.
 
Little "L"

I've known (much to my shame) for some time that I'm a libertarian.

I'm sure there's a twelve-step program somewhere.

The two issues I keeping seeing mentioned are "gay" and "abortion" things.

Gay: Knock yourself out. But don't try to sell me or tell me that I need to make special allowances for you. No one makes special allowances for me. I don't get to tell people they have to respect me "extra special" because I chose to be married/religion X/an engineer/whatever. Make your choices, live with them, be honest about them. Leave me alone about them. Government stays out of it.

Abortion: When you need it, you need it. Abortion sucks. No, you don't get the story of why I know this. Any elective surgery is handled the same way as any other elective surgery. If you can afford it, then it's your choice. I'm not paying for your medical choices. You choose, you pay. Emergencies are handled like any other emergencies. Government stays out of it.

For these and anything like them, you do what you know to be right, and own the results of your choices. Don't sell your choices as somehow extra-righteous or worthy of special dispensations or worthy of government funding or protection.

It's your life. You live it.
 
I consider myself libertarian with a lowercase "l". There are some hardcore ones who want to privatize everything, such as the highway system and turn the national parks over to private ownership too. Sorry, I kind of like the highway system and think we have a lot of national treasures that need to be preserved for everyone to enjoy.
Click to expand...

Most of the big environmental disasters have been on "government" land. The parks are a tiny percentage of the US (and who's to say there wouldn't be private parks, if the immense drain of government was removed? I'd certainly contribute). Most of the BLM and Forest Service land is reserved for special interests to exploit, but not to preserve... because there's no future in investing to protect land that you don't own.

On private land, on the other hand, people plant trees that won't mature in their lifetime, because it enhances the present value of the land. If government ownership was good for the environment, then there would still be an Aral Sea, most of Kazakhstan would still have topsoil, etc.

And there have always been some private highways.. with modern technology the main obstacle (stopping for tolls) has been removed.

All this said, at this point it would be an amazing feat if we could just get secure title to our homes again vs. eminent domain, let alone the forests or the roads.
 
The Constitution Party is the American version of the Taliban. We dont need a Christian government.
Click to expand...
Yup, the constitution party doesn't stand for freedom, it stands for fundamentalist christian values. I'm all for people who are fundamentalist christians getting to be fundamentalists christians, but when those people start to tell me that I can't do my own thing, like say watch pornography, I will certainly not call them friends of liberty.

the constitution party said:
We call on our local, state and federal governments to uphold our cherished First Amendment right to free speech by vigorously enforcing our laws against obscenity
Click to expand...
Is that something like supporting the 2nd amendment by banning guns?
 
Please allow yet another libertarian to welcome you to the club. As the far as the other options, for me there aren't any, both the Democrats and republicans make me cranky and ill tempered. I'm feeling kinda wishy washy about the borders lately but the libs are stil the ones who get my vote. I'm not even going to mention the CP other than to echo Soybomb, too theocratic and hysterical for me. I would prefer my .gov to stay far out of my bedroom and entertainment choices. I'm a grown up and can generally make choices that hurt no one but me. I probably read to much Heinlien and as a kid. Or just too much Heinlien period because I tend to reread something by him every couple years at least.
 
In honor of this thread I just paid my $25 donation to become a card carrying Libertarian. I will vote Libertarian from now on.

I had voted for George W. Bush in the two presidential elections I have voted in (due to my age) and Republican in all of the other elections. I vote Green over a Republican or Democrat if possible however this is rare.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
Libertarian Party
Replies
2
Views
388
geekWithA.45
G
T
  • Locked
Why everybody should be a Libertarian
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
133
Views
4K
TheBluesMan
T
S
  • Locked
Is is time to join Libertarian Party?
2 3
Replies
71
Views
2K
Pocket.38
P
M
  • Locked
Why Libertarians Suck
Replies
2
Views
2K
Marko Kloos
M
A
  • Locked
Party Registration Dilemma
2
Replies
28
Views
713
ArmedBear
A
Back
Top