Comments On Libertarian/Conservative Debate

[PostmodernProphet]

I see that as key, myself....I think economically and politically there is little difference between Libertarian and Reagan style Republican, but on social issues the Libertarians are too liberal for my tastes....

[PostmodernProphet]

sorry....I view the threads by clicking the "new" button....I seldom bother to see which forum they are in....

[Kathianne]

This thread is for anyone that wishes to comment or further discussion on the ongoing debate between Emmett and Crin. The one-on-one thread is for the debaters only.

However, I'm fairly certain that both will read any comments and know that both are capable of responding and/or using any relevant arguments that are placed here.

[Missileman]

Crin is so anxious to legislate HIS religious morals that he would criminalize homosexuality. I wonder if he'd endorse a law forcing his wife to don a burka.

BTW Crin...you're either exaggerating your experiences with homosexuals or you've got a serious case of gay vibe.

[emmett]

Crin is so anxious to legislate HIS religious morals that he would criminalize homosexuality. I wonder if he'd endorse a law forcing his wife to don a burka.

BTW Crin...you're either exaggerating your experiences with homosexuals or you've got a serious case of gay vibe.

I don't think Crin wants to legislate his religious morals. Crin is founded in strong Christian faith. The Bible teaches us that these behaviors are improper and therefore sins. I do feel that Crin like many other Christian people, confuse the purpose of religion in Government. That becomes a Church and State issue.

Frankly if Crin could have his way and these things be non existant, i'd be just fine with that myself. The reality however is that like you say, we will not legislate these things away. Making them against the law will not eliminate them. People will always make bad choices. Robbery is against the law but people still steal.

My contention that choice to engage in these activities should be allowed does not constitute my endorsement of them. Homosexual behavior between two consenting adults is choice. It's a bad choice in my opinion, a terrible one frankly, but it does not harm anyone outside the realm of the consenting parties. I think Crin is confusing pedophilia, which is to me different. That is a crime and would always remain so. No human being in their right mind endorses this type of sickening behavior.

[actsnoblemartin]

I dont think that's fair.

with all due respect, crin has never said anything remotely close to what your alleging

and im a pro homosexual rights advocate


Crin is so anxious to legislate HIS religious morals that he would criminalize homosexuality. I wonder if he'd endorse a law forcing his wife to don a burka.

BTW Crin...you're either exaggerating your experiences with homosexuals or you've got a serious case of gay vibe.

[Kathianne]

I dont think that's fair.

with all due respect, crin has never said anything remotely close to what your alleging

and im a pro homosexual rights advocate

Whoa, thought you'd been born again and were seeing all the gays in hell?

[actsnoblemartin]

nah
Whoa, thought you'd been born again and were seeing all the gays in hell?

[Kathianne]

nah

So, god wasn't speaking to your heart? You took Tums?

[Missileman]

I dont think that's fair.

with all due respect, crin has never said anything remotely close to what your alleging

and im a pro homosexual rights advocate

You are mistaken.


I would treat homosexuals just like any other deviant pedophile...They are in my opinion just as bad as any heterosexual pedophile and should be treated the same, even if that means legislating against them. They are not benign, they are a cancer rotting our society and like any cancer they need to be removed as quickly as possible.

[crin63]

Crin is so anxious to legislate HIS religious morals that he would criminalize homosexuality. I wonder if he'd endorse a law forcing his wife to don a burka.

BTW Crin...you're either exaggerating your experiences with homosexuals or you've got a serious case of gay vibe.

I impose my religious moral convictions at home but my wife doesn't wear a burka and no where close to that kind of relationship. I have never advocated imposing my religious moral convictions on the public.

I was kind of a, "pretty boy" when I was young. I always had girls after me and when I was places like Disneyland or Summer Camp I always picked up on the hottest girls not to mention girls would come up and ask to have their pictures taken with me. I had the lead singer of Bow Wow Wow (Anabella) stop and sing, "I Want Candy" to me at her concert.

So I guess that would explain why things happened to me the way they did, whether you believe it or not. I'll let others decide if I'm honest or not.

[glockmail]

I see that as key, myself....I think economically and politically there is little difference between Libertarian and Reagan style Republican, but on social issues the Libertarians are too liberal for my tastes.... The Republican Party can go nowhere without social conservatives.

I agree with most Libertarian views on the fiscal side. On the regulatory side we agree on the Federal level.

[Missileman]

I have never advocated imposing my religious moral convictions on the public.

As homosexuals are part of the public, your statements indicate otherwise.

[glockmail]

Queers don't deserve the same rights as normal folks. *shrug*

[Mr. P]

Queers don't deserve the same rights as normal folks. *shrug*

Yeah and neither do blonds, they're so dumb and stuff. :rolleyes:

[glockmail]

Yeah and neither do blonds, they're so dumb and stuff. :rolleyes: If they are in fact dumb, then no they shouldn't get the same privileges as smarter folks.

[PostmodernProphet]

the problem isn't getting the same priveliges.....the problem is when some want things done FOR them, because they are too dumb to do it by themselves like the rest of us do......in truth, they want MORE than the rest since they are incapable of doing it themselves.....

[crin63]

As homosexuals are part of the public, your statements indicate otherwise.

My personal opinion of homosexuality developed long before my religious views of homosexuality did. My religious views actually constrain me from acting in the manner that my natural reaction would be.

[emmett]

My personal opinion of homosexuality developed long before my religious views of homosexuality did. My religious views actually constrain me from acting in the manner that my natural reaction would be.

Since your main basis for claiming that you cannot endorse the agenda of the Libertarian Party is homosexuality....I have to disagree with your statement. You do confuse government's responsibility to legislate this "problem" away.

I somewhat agree with Monkey's statement that you feel we should legislate the problem away. We all know however that this cannot be done. Allowing the homo's to stop you from a total commitment to your political beliefs is empowering them Crin. We need change in this country. REAL change. We need Ten Million Libertarian votes brother. Our failure to do this each election allows us to slip one step closer to Socialism each and every time.

Nothing would get the attention of both major parties more than Ten Million Libertarian votes. NOTHING!

[actsnoblemartin]

god might have been speaking to me, but i misunderstood what he meant.


So, god wasn't speaking to your heart? You took Tums?

[actsnoblemartin]

You are mistaken.


how so

[Missileman]

how so

All you have to do is read the quote I posted.

[emmett]

I'm very interested to hear from the regulars on this debate. Do you think we are spinning our wheels in the mud?

As for the others and some of the folks who cannot go three posts without namecalling and repetitive mean spirited conjecture. This my friends...is a debate! Watch carefully now....and learn....how two people who sharply disagree on a couple of issues continue to hammer away at one another in a forum using the only weapon each would consider using..........words!

Crin is my friend. My good friend. I am frustrated with him however because i can't get him to see things my way. He as well, can't get me to change my opinion either. So the debate is useless right? WRONG! It will continue. Each of us will continue to make our point, attempting to slightly change the language a bit each post in an attempt to say it a different way so as to convince the other that our way is the correct way.

I'm interested in the opinions of others here on this thread so jump in. Let us hear your side. Take one of our sides, or take a stand against our side. Let us hear what you think as this continues.

[crin63]

I'm very interested to hear from the regulars on this debate. Do you think we are spinning our wheels in the mud?

As for the others and some of the folks who cannot go three posts without namecalling and repetitive mean spirited conjecture. This my friends...is a debate! Watch carefully now....and learn....how two people who sharply disagree on a couple of issues continue to hammer away at one another in a forum using the only weapon each would consider using..........words!

Crin is my friend. My good friend. I am frustrated with him however because i can't get him to see things my way. He as well, can't get me to change my opinion either. So the debate is useless right? WRONG! It will continue. Each of us will continue to make our point, attempting to slightly change the language a bit each post in an attempt to say it a different way so as to convince the other that our way is the correct way.

I'm interested in the opinions of others here on this thread so jump in. Let us hear your side. Take one of our sides, or take a stand against our side. Let us hear what you think as this continues.

What is the verdict from the jury of our peers?

I realize the debate drug out because I was out of town and taking care of other issues but how did we do?

[Kathianne]

I don't know about anyone else, but my guess is we are all where we were before. Crin and I don't agree on some issues or at least how we address those issues at times. On the other hand like him, I see problems with the Libertarian Party, though different reasons. I feel it is easier to address my pov within a party I'm established with; while if there were a reasonable candidate from the Libertarian Party, I wouldn't hesitate to vote for them.

[emmett]

I thinnk it will be extremely difficult, especially in a volatile time such as this to see a third party of any philosophy become a major influence. There ceertainly are issues of varying degrees that people have with the Libertarian party or we would be realizing better numbers, given that our philosophy seems to agree with many in other parties yet as mentioned, those numbers of new members do stay down.

I like you all, if I saw the Republican Party truely begin to embrace the issues of liberty the way they used to, would vote that way. I just have a problem staying with a system that continues to move in the wriong direction on matters concerning liberty. It is in essence the fabric of our freedom. Liberty is bit more important thasn I think Republicans realize anymore. As we see it being taken from us however I am hopeful that people will come around. Even if it does not result in the growth of the Libertarian Party, I would pray that it leads to the result of an entity developing that will help turn around this sorryful state of government controlled everything. I still see the Libertarian Party as the best alternative to accomplish this.

(Emmett whispers softly.....) "I do wish the Party wasn't so influenced by the Liberal wing." Of course that is between y'all and me.

Somehow I wish a meeting of the minds could result in a Party that seemed to meet in the middle. One that understood liberty is essential to American life, small government is a better way to ensure more liberty and yet still ensure a lawful and soveriegn society that understands responsibility. Also a flat or fair tax being the center of that platform. I believe then we on both sides would find it easier to give a little bit more and realize more "unity" together.

The fact is I want to be a member of the same party as Kathy AND Crin. I want to be united with all folks who think Conservatively in Economics and are willing to allow people to make thier own choices without the mandate of an extremist philosophy of religion interjected into government. I believe in my heart like likeminded people with slightly differing opinions can co-exist in one basic platform if the majority of it represents a basic good and repels the philosophy of the left. I do know that we are losing this battle together as we "slightly" disagree, as the numbers clearly show and unless we find that "common ground" we are doomed to fail with those slightly different philosophies all meaning NOTHING in the end.

I'm done!

[Immanuel]

Emmett, my friend,

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but from where I am sitting you have lost this debate. Your stated goal was to convince Crin to switch to the Libertarian Party and from the looks of things... well, you lose.

I suppose when you get right down to it, that come 2010 you will (since you are a man of your word) and for all future elections (until we get through Crin's thick skull that is) you will be voting Republican. I am sorry to hear that, because when you get right down to it the Republicans are no different than the Democrats.

Crin, my friend,

You do have a thick skull. I left the Republican Party. I did not join any party although I voted Libertarian last election. The fact of the matter as I see it is that although the Republicans pay your position lip service, that is in fact all they do. They do not have any intention of outlawing either abortion or homosexuality and quite frankly even though I believe both of those issue to be immoral, legislating them will not eliminate them.

As for the church/state issue, I agree with you in many respects. Nothing in the First Amendment nor anywhere else that I know of states that God/Bible/faith cannot be discussed in schools or government. The position that it does is a left wing lie to take away our voices. However, the most important thing is that the State does not dictate to us what we may/may not believe.

All in all, I would say that this was a good debate with good points brought forth from both sides and I commend you both for behaving like gentlemen throughout the debate.

Emmett when you do vote Republican in 2010, just look at it like this, "your vote doesn't really count anyway". The only thing that really matters is who is counting the votes.

Immie

[emmett]

I respectfully disagree with you Immie. On the topic of rather I lost the debate. Crin insists on discussing one two issues....Abortion and Homosexuality.

While I respect his position very much...and I do, he has failed to make any headwaves what so ever in these regards other than to promote a Church & State agenda hard core. No party prescribes to that philosophy so he may as well start his own party.

I am a man of my word however and if by 2010 Crin is not a registered Libertarian I will indeed go to the poll and write in "Ron Paul" for president who is a registered Republican, which would make me a man of my word.

In the same token I still have to hear from him on some other issue of the debate, in which he does not respond. The Republican Party is failing America and yet Crin and many other fine Americans still go out and vote for them. This bothers me. While he (Crin) and those other good people are standing on their values concerning abortion and homosexuality (and the War on Drugs) for many other Republicans, our country is being taken from us. Our liberty is being taken one step at a time. I wonder if Crin and his constituants realize that when we lose this battle, Abortion will still be legal and homos will be everywhere, they will be legally married and he, you and I will be paying their social security benefits to surviving parties in those civil (evil) unions.

[Immanuel]

I respectfully disagree with you Immie. On the topic of rather I lost the debate. Crin insists on discussing one two issues....Abortion and Homosexuality.

While I respect his position very much...and I do, he has failed to make any headwaves what so ever in these regards other than to promote a Church & State agenda hard core. No party prescribes to that philosophy so he may as well start his own party.

I am a man of my word however and if by 2010 Crin is not a registered Libertarian I will indeed go to the poll and write in "Ron Paul" for president who is a registered Republican, which would make me a man of my word.

In the same token I still have to hear from him on some other issue of the debate, in which he done not respond. The Republican Party is failing America and yet Crin and many other fine Americans still go out and vote for them. This bothers me. While he (Crin) and those other good people are standing on their values concerning abortion and homosexuality (and the War on Drugs) for many other Republicans, our country is being taken from us. Our liberty is being taken one step at a time. I wonder if Crin and his constituants realize that when we lose this battle, Abortion will still be legal and homos will be everywhere, they will be legally married and he, you and I will be paying their social security benefits to surviving parties in those civil (evil) unions.

While I agree with you in your synopsis, the fact is you set yourself up to fail from the very beginning. You stated your goal was to convince him to change parties. That hasn't happened.

I agree that the Republican Party does nothing more than pay lip service to the pro-life movement and has does nothing what so ever in opposition to the "gay agenda", but apparently you have not convinced Crin of that. Not only that, but I am not convinced that should the Libertarian Party somehow find a foothold and become a contending party over night, that they would be any different than the Democrats or the Republicans. We'd simply have three parties feeding us bull rather than two.

Immie

[emmett]

While I agree with you in your synopsis, the fact is you set yourself up to fail from the very beginning. You stated your goal was to convince him to change parties. That hasn't happened.

I agree that the Republican Party does nothing more than pay lip service to the pro-life movement and has does nothing what so ever in opposition to the "gay agenda", but apparently you have not convinced Crin of that. Not only that, but I am not convinced that should the Libertarian Party somehow find a foothold and become a contending party over night, that they would be any different than the Democrats or the Republicans. We'd simply have three parties feeding us bull rather than two.

Immie


On that my good friend I do most certainly disagree. I have found Libertarians to very convicted people. Way more so than either of the two "other" parties.

Over the years I have taken much greif over my conviction to the Libertarian philosophy. I've heard it all. The War on Drugs, Abortion and the condoning of Homosexuality. Until the party changed it's official position I heard an earful of the "Open Borders" argument as well. Yes Sir, I have heard many a good credible argument of why these things should not be condoned by people. I agree in theory with all of them. I do not take drugs and detest those that sell them, I hate Abortion, am borderline homophobic as it makes me extremely uncomfortable to be around them and I surely do not want anymore illegals wandering around eating up our resources and jobs. What I do embrace is the idea of Liberty and that I live in the only country on earth whose people hold their privacy and freedom in such high esteem.

I just don't think there can be a middle ground. Government empowers itself with each gulp of control it gains when it passes another infringing law that restricts choice or how it can be made by citizens. Every time our legislators have written another law we have taken one more small step down a stairwell to hell in my opinion. The "Common Good" excuse of why we write so many laws is tired and stale. We should have known better. Libertarians realize this and the other two parties do not. It's that simple to me.

Being a Libertarian is one of the easiest choices I have ever made. I have always been one. I am just a natural Libertarian, if there is such a thing. I have no desire to influence any choices anyone makes...ever! In return, I want the same for me and my family. I also believe that most every Libertarian I have ever met believe the same thing. This is why I think that if our party were to ever gain some momentum we would not turn into what the other two parties have so I disagree. I think a Congress full of Libertarians would influence the others to return to the thinking of our forefathers and represent their conscience. I believe we do now and that is why Democrats and Republicans fear the message that we bring. We are restricted from debates, ignored and not taken seriously for a reason and that is because we threaten to derail the corruptive influences they represent and the power they enjoy.

I think if Harry Browne had been elected president we would not be where we are today. A Libertarian would be an excellent referee for the Congress and Senate. Could you just imagine what a change lawmaking would take if every Bill ever introduced had to face a Libertarian President before it could become law.

Libertarians are champions for things like privacy, liberty and choice. I want those things in my life as an American. I also believe that Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior. I believe that God can be the judge of people's personal actions just fine and that government violates every concievable possible violation of this idea by attempting to take away my choices of how to live by "governing" my personal life. I believe I am entitled to the fruits of my labour and that man has no right to take a thing from me. When I have what I determine to be some extra, I will give. I believe if someone else wants something they should go out and earn it or they will suffer. If they do not suffer they will not learn to subsist.

I have no problems with communities getting together to decide to enact benefit programs for their neighbors but it should be done on a community basis, not mandated by a federal government. I believe everyone should work hard and not be penalized because they have worked harder than someone else. I also believe I have no right to decide how anyone lives their life even if they have chosen to live in a way I do not condone. It is not my job. That job belongs to one entity...God. At the time of his choosing he will judge that person(s). I do think it prudent, advisable actually to try and influence persons to live in a manner that is more conducive to what Christians believe but it is no right of anyone to make it "law". That is the kind of stuff that led to executions for people for not living like supposed people of God thought they should. A Church ran State has never worked. They all failed! Every single one of them. The examples of Church ran states can be observed in places like...what do you know....Iran! No Thanks!

I'm proud to be a Libertarian. I'm also a realist. Homosexuality is not going to be illegal. I wouldn't waste my otherwise well directed efforts to make other differences such as in liberty to hold on to some pipe dream that I might be able to find a party that would "outlaw" it and put homos in prison. That is silly! I would rather align myself with folks who are interested in taking back what has been lost first. Like our ability to choose the way we live our own lives.....not the lives of Homosexuals. I don;t give a flip about them. I do care about a man having his house torn down so a condo complex can be built. Continuing to subscribe to one of the two parties who allowed that kind of crap to take place while wishing we could outlaw homosexuality is like I said....a Pipe dream! Failure to band together with other likeminded people who wish to prevent a man from losing his poroperty to Eminant Domain, is condoning it!

So.......while others sit back and think they can make their Republican Party better, help yourself! They sold you out! You let em when you go back to that voting booth and vote for them. I can;t do that! What it is simply is FEAR! Fear to step up when the odds are bad and the numbers are against you. Thank God All Mighty that the Revolutionaries didn;t think like that.

I'm done!

[Immanuel]

And I agree with much of what you say, but when you get right down to it: power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Money does as well... every one of those who would magically end up in power over night would be subject to corruption and I honestly do not believe that most humans (including me) can withstand the temptation of enough "offers" coming their way.

Immie

[emmett]

You are right.....power does corrupt. Whether Libertarians would be as prone to follow that road I guess leaves left to be seen. I would certainly hope they wouldn't mirror the crap we have now.

[Immanuel]

You are right.....power does corrupt. Whether Libertarians would be as prone to follow that road I guess leaves left to be seen. I would certainly hope they wouldn't mirror the crap we have now.

As you can probably tell, I do not have a very high opinion of politicians of any ilk including those who appear to think like me. I think there are good people from all political walks of life, but when they get into politics things change. They simply can not prevent it from happening if they are going to be successful in politics.

Immie

[emmett]

As you can probably tell, I do not have a very high opinion of politicians of any ilk including those who appear to think like me. I think there are good people from all political walks of life, but when they get into politics things change. They simply can not prevent it from happening if they are going to be successful in politics.

Immie


Agreed. There are some whom power was not ever able to corrupt. Zell Miller for example. While a Democrat, Senator Miller spent a lifetime serving in a manner unlike that of most politicians. He voted with his conscience, did not cater to a political party philosophy and in my opinion was honorable. I also believe Joe Lieberman to be an honorable man. Again a Democrat but he stands up for what he truly believes to be right.

I'm sitting here straining to try and think of any others I believe to be in that class but I am drawing a blank. I believe Harry Browne was true ion his intention to serve America but of course he is deceased now. A Libertarian.

So...come to think of it....you are right, they are all corrupt, dishonest power mongers. We should fire them all and start over by golly.