Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't know who said it, but some libertarian is quoted as saying: "I want gay married couples to be able to use guns to protect their marijuana plants."
To me it is the language. Liberal and Libertarian are similar by definition.
The opposition to libertarianism is not liberalism. It is authoritarianism.Right now the United States is governed mostly by Authoritarians. Whether theyare Bible belt Republicans or Progressive statist Democrats there is verylittle resembling libertarianism when considering American politics
Furthermore, much to the chagrin of the reactionary authoritarian,Libertarianism is NOT akin to anarchy.
Do you guys believe a child could make decisions about sex?
(ex,a child of 12 consenting to sex)?
You guys believe that employers have the right to not hire whole groups of people,and refuse services?
1. There should be no state. Question is null.
2. Don't know and don't care. Even "good" parents don't know everything their kid does or what they're going through. My personal opinion is they still have a better idea and a right to monitor such things than a dude in a suit sitting in an office in Washington.
3. Yes. And everyone should have the right to use non-aggressive force/coercion to show their pleasure/displeasure with the company and owners. Right now the state allows people to hide behind statutes so we don't know who they really are. When Bob's Automotive refuses to fix flat tires for Thai women under 6 ft tall don't run to the state looking for it to fine, imprison, or kill Bob. Instead, call me up and form an association agreeing to not do business with Bob. I'll be down for that.
The whole purpose of the state is to divide the populace and make us think we can't work problems out for ourselves without fining, imprisoning, or killing others.
Do you guys believe a child could make decisions about sex?
(ex,a child of 12 consenting to sex)?
You guys believe that employers have the right to not hire whole groups of people,and refuse services?
You are just trying to paint the libertarians as pervert and racists who would have sex with sisters/brothers and children.
Can I ask if two brothers having sex, would that be considered as gay sex or incest? If they choose to get married, should they be allowed in the liberal mind?
If you think Affirmative Action is not racist, then when do I see such diversity in NBA?
OK, first of all, I know ahead of time this is the standard "make all libertarians look like perverts and weirdos" appeal to ridicule ad hominem. I know this ahead of time, but I am going to answer anyway, as both true blue, dyed in the wool libertarian and a devout, practicing Catholic (yes, you can indeed be both, contrary to what the media idiots tell you).
Age of consent laws are arbitrary numbers yanked from thin air that have more to do with when the average person graduates high school than is emotionally, physically and mentally mature. By and large, most people are not all around mature until they hit ~25-30, but we decided 18 for most stuff, 21 for other stuff, leave it at that. And most people are in agreement. That's the collective "morality" - at 18, you are magically more mature, informed, and capable of decision making than you were the day before when you were 17 years and 364 days old. It's our line in the sand, okie doke.
Thing is, it has nothing to do with biology, which has that whole puberty thing to signify when you're ready for sex, and why even in our own culture less than 100 years ago, girls being married at age 14 was not all that rare, and unmarried at 18 made you a spinster. So for decisions about sex, puberty is a pretty solid indicator of "physically ready" and then it is up to the individual for "mentally/emotionally ready." For me it was age 14. For most of my friends, it was 13-16. Then again, I knew both boys and girls who waited until 19-21. It was different according to the individual. Do I personally think 12 is too young? Sure, a 12 year old is not emotionally or mentally mature, but it isn't like I was so vastly more mature at 14, and that's when I consented to it for the first time. So like most all social issues...it's up to the individual, but generally, puberty is a good indicator of the human "ready for sex" flag.
As far as incest goes...same thing. Up to the individual. Only reason it isn't legal in America is because of the estate taxation rules, which is better for spouses than it is for family. Yeah, there's an ick factor to it, but any argument in favor of homosexual marriages/relationships/unions/whatever works just as well for incest, and government should not be in the business of marriage in the first place. Now, I realize you likely asked the question from a "oh, so you support pedophilia" angle, but you asked about incest, not pedophilia, so bear that in mind before you try to straw man the pedophile thing. Why should two family members of legal contract age, sound mind & body, not be able to join in a union? Do I find it repellent in every way? Sure, but a whole lot of folks think my Catholic, husband/wife/G-d covenant thinking to be equally repellent. That's why morality issues should be the province of the individual, not the collective.
And employers, as owners of the job, should be allowed to hire anyone they want for the job for any reason, or not hire anyone they don't want for any reason as well. It's their job. Ownership of self and property, and respect for that ownership is the cornerstone of liberty itself.
weird,and gross.
i know a girl going through puberty at 6.
So i guess in your eyes she is ready?
2. Don't know and don't care. Even "good" parents don't know everything their kid does or what they're going through. My personal opinion is they still have a better idea and a right to monitor such things than a dude in a suit sitting in an office in Washington.
3. Yes. And everyone should have the right to use non-aggressive force/coercion to show their pleasure/displeasure with the company and owners. Right now the state allows people to hide behind statutes so we don't know who they really are. When Bob's Automotive refuses to fix flat tires for Thai women under 6 ft tall don't run to the state looking for it to fine, imprison, or kill Bob. Instead, call me up and form an association agreeing to not do business with Bob. I'll be down for that.
The whole purpose of the state is to divide the populace and make us think we can't work problems out for ourselves without fining, imprisoning, or killing others.
Question #2.....you say parents decide what s best for their kids,but what if it is the parents harming the kid?
i know a girl going through puberty at 6.
So i guess in your eyes she is ready?
Anecdotal, hypothetical statistical sample of 1 being trotted out to straw man what I wrote into "weird and gross," but I did know it was coming and I did call it ahead of time. Thanks for proving me prescient.
I find the whole massive age difference in sex, especially adults with either adolescents or teenagers, to be repugnant in every way. Then again, a 30 year old with an 80 year old has an equal effect on my Icky Meter. But what I find icky and repugnant THAT DOES NOT DIRECTLY AFFECT ME IN ANY WAY should not be the basis of legislating the morality and personal, private behavior of others.
Again, I am a devout, practicing Catholic, and most likely have a stricter PERSONAL AND PRIVATE moral code than most on this forum....but my Catholic faith and my strict/uptight personal morality should not be the basis for how YOU live your life. What I see "in my eyes" is a pretty seriously sinful, wicked, depraved world. You don't want your private life controlled by Leviathan under the marching orders of what I see "in my eyes" according to my morality. According to my morality, all sex outside a marriage between one man, one woman in covenant with G-d the Father is a sin against the Sacrament of Marriage. You want that to be the new law of the land anytime soon? Really? Don't even get me started on adultery, which covers so much more than just cheating on a spouse (and btw, I think infidelity is the single worst offense one person can commit against another, since murder kills the body, but infidelity kills the soul). You draw your moral line at super icky, but my super-icky and yours are probably very different.
This is why morality should be left to the individual. If it isn't harming someone, and they choose to participate, whether you find it repellent or icky should not be the basis of its legality or acceptability for others. That doesn't make me "weird and gross," rather, it means I am not arrogant enough to think my personal morality is so superior and awesome that it should be the law governing 330 million people.
That's what a libertarian believes. Not that everyone is right, but that as long as their action isn't harming, obligating or otherwise interfering with someone else, it simply isn't my business.
Anecdotal, hypothetical statistical sample of 1 being trotted out to straw man what I wrote into "weird and gross," but I did know it was coming and I did call it ahead of time. Thanks for proving me prescient.
I find the whole massive age difference in sex, especially adults with either adolescents or teenagers, to be repugnant in every way. Then again, a 30 year old with an 80 year old has an equal effect on my Icky Meter. But what I find icky and repugnant THAT DOES NOT DIRECTLY AFFECT ME IN ANY WAY should not be the basis of legislating the morality and personal, private behavior of others.
Again, I am a devout, practicing Catholic, and most likely have a stricter PERSONAL AND PRIVATE moral code than most on this forum....but my Catholic faith and my strict/uptight personal morality should not be the basis for how YOU live your life. What I see "in my eyes" is a pretty seriously sinful, wicked, depraved world. You don't want your private life controlled by Leviathan under the marching orders of what I see "in my eyes" according to my morality. According to my morality, all sex outside a marriage between one man, one woman in covenant with G-d the Father is a sin against the Sacrament of Marriage. You want that to be the new law of the land anytime soon? Really? Don't even get me started on adultery, which covers so much more than just cheating on a spouse (and btw, I think infidelity is the single worst offense one person can commit against another, since murder kills the body, but infidelity kills the soul). You draw your moral line at super icky, but my super-icky and yours are probably very different.
This is why morality should be left to the individual. If it isn't harming someone, and they choose to participate, whether you find it repellent or icky should not be the basis of its legality or acceptability for others. That doesn't make me "weird and gross," rather, it means I am not arrogant enough to think my personal morality is so superior and awesome that it should be the law governing 330 million people.
That's what a libertarian believes. Not that everyone is right, but that as long as their action isn't harming, obligating or otherwise interfering with someone else, it simply isn't my business.
Can't rep you but well said!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
lol 
