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.
Very good point. I'm amazed by the so-called libertarians who seem to think it would be perfectly fine for states to take away every civil liberty we've got. They've got libertarianism and federalism mixed up.
Well, more state and local control allows people to be more involved in government and to play a greater role in making decisions that affect them.
What does that have to do with Libertarianism? I could see that as more democratic, but not really libertarian. If 75% of the people in a state want to ban guns, is that Libertarian?
If you are ok with the local or state government being oppressive, how is that libertarian???
Very good point. I'm amazed by the so-called libertarians who seem to think it would be perfectly fine for states to take away every civil liberty we've got. They've got libertarianism and federalism mixed up.
I'm sure you are right but old Savoir won't agree with you.
What does that have to do with Libertarianism? I could see that as more democratic, but not really libertarian. If 75% of the people in a state want to ban guns, is that Libertarian?
If you are ok with the local or state government being oppressive, how is that libertarian???
Well, I am not libertarian. I'd describe myself as a conservative-leaning and libertarian-leaning centrist.
That said, the point is that, when control is more local, you can have more influence. Think about city council meetings and school board meetings, for example. People attend those regularly and make their voices heard.
Also, in theory, people could move to a place where they liked the laws and this would result in people liking their local laws more than laws "forced upon" the entire country.
I agree with this to some degree, but not when it comes to things like banning guns or banning sodomy (from the other thread).
Well, I am not libertarian. I'd describe myself as a conservative-leaning and libertarian-leaning centrist.
That said, the point is that, when control is more local, you can have more influence. Think about city council meetings and school board meetings, for example. People attend those regularly and make their voices heard.
Also, in theory, people could move to a place where they liked the laws and this would result in people liking their local laws more than laws "forced upon" the entire country.
I agree with this to some degree, but not when it comes to things like banning guns or banning sodomy (from the other thread).
Libertarian isn't about liking the laws or having more local influence.
Libertarianism is about PROTECTING God-given rights.
Their is no tolerance for TAKING away rights in the libertarian movement.
Only the democrats want to take rights away.
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.
