Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Libertarians & Conservatives

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    I am a conservative that is FOR abortion and same sex marriage. I agree with a lot more than I disagree with. No party is 100% spot on to any ones given beliefs.

    Comment


      #32
      Originally posted by txpitdog View Post
      I read it but your point was made in the first section. It sounds like you believe that it is the role of the government to eliminate personal freedom when that government decides the people are not capable of making the choice it has determined to be "right". That ain't conservative, that's due south on the chart.
      No, i clearly didn't state or imply that it is gov'ts role to eliminate personal freedoms.

      But when the totality of those "personal choices" becomes a burden on society what choice is gov't left with?

      Comment


        #33
        Originally posted by Playa View Post
        But when the totality of those "personal choices" becomes a burden on society what choice is gov't left with?

        And that statement right there, dang near verbatim, is the root of the left's justification for wanting to strike the 2nd Amendment from the Constitution. Might as well take the 4th while you're at it as a BOGOF deal.

        Comment


          #34
          Originally posted by Playa View Post
          No, i clearly didn't state or imply that it is gov'ts role to eliminate personal freedoms.

          But when the totality of those "personal choices" becomes a burden on society what choice is gov't left with?
          Stop allowing it be a burden, ie stop entitlements. Once the person who created the "burden" has to take personal responsibility for it they will begin to make smarter decisions.

          Govt. is so good at making the argument that there is a cost to a social issue and the only reason there is a cost is because the Govt created one.

          Comment


            #35
            My take is that we have allowed the gubment to claim Biblical terms for use in gubment laws and philosophy, and therein lies the big problem (for me personally at least). Some, even many, maybe most will disagree with me but my belief is that the term "marriage" is a God-given law and He clearly describes it in His Word as the union of one man and one woman, and the two when joined by Holy Matrimony become one flesh, inseparable in His eyes until at death they separate. The other big term that the gubment has claimed as its own that is a Biblical principle and defining principle is "life" itself. When as God has designed it an egg and a male spern are conjoined, that is the very conception of life and that fertilized mass is indeed a person with a soul that will live on for all eternity, a child of God.

            These two issues alone would preclude and exclude me from ever joining with ANY group whether political or otherwise that does not support this or believe this as God's Law.

            Please, I don't post this to start an argument or anything. It is what I believe, and I further believe that one cannot call themselves Christian if they believe otherwise.

            XBowhunter, you posted the other day that you and I have a lot in common with respect to our beliefs, and this right here is the chasm that separates you and me. We have little to nothing in common if you are not a believer in God and in his Son as your savior. I don't mean that in a mean or disrespectful way at all. It is however my belief and I am forever given to that belief until the Lord calls me home.
            Last edited by SaltwaterSlick; 03-09-2017, 01:51 PM. Reason: tnik fingerz

            Comment


              #36
              SS, I respect your beliefs and share some of them. But I don't want my government to be involved in my religious beliefs. I don't want them picking or choosing which religious beliefs to legislate (Christian or otherwise). Government should stay out of the religious bidness.

              Comment


                #37
                Originally posted by LWC View Post
                SS, I respect your beliefs and share some of them. But I don't want my government to be involved in my religious beliefs. I don't want them picking or choosing which religious beliefs to legislate (Christian or otherwise). Government should stay out of the religious bidness.
                Yessir and in general, I share that philosophy except that our gubment when founded and formed was done so with a Christian perspective. I happen to believe they were right in their founding this Great Nation and by using God's Word as a guide and through prayerful consideration, wrote our Declaration of Independence, The Constitution of the United States and Bill of Rights. For this reason, I personally believe that God has blessed this Great Nation and continues to do so. However we are getting pretty close to a point where He well could remove His blessing from it. When that happens, it will be clearly evident and this Great Nation will fail and cease to be. The methodology and philosophies are there and our complacency are allowing it to get closer and closer, dangerously closer.

                We are clearly told in God's Word that there is a just and right place for the governance of His people, but when government and God's Word collide, there is absolutely no choice for His people but to follow God's word. Now that sounds a lot like what the jihadi's may say as well except for the fact that Almighty God is The God of Peace and will never lead His People to destruction unless they turn away from Him. It is His desire that none be lost, and it is up to us who are believers and followers of His Son Jesus Christ to give the Word to all we can so that they may not perish. That is my sole motivation and responsibility outside of being a good steward of all He provides me while on the green side of the grass.

                Comment


                  #38
                  I hear ya, but I don't share your belief in regards to religion in government. What happens when the next Reality Show Star happens to be a jihadist instead of a real estate mogul.....and our low information voting brothers and sisters elect him to a high political office? I'd just as soon those two very important issues be kept separate.

                  Comment


                    #39
                    Originally posted by XBowHunter View Post
                    How do you see the philosophy differently than the political party?
                    The philosphy of libertarianism has many strains, some contradictory and far too diverse to fit on a party platform. There are left wing libertarians and right wing libertarians, some are pro life but most are pro choice, many are for open borders. All are for small government but some go as far as to say the only role of government is national defense and to protect individual rights. Some are mainstream guys like the Koch brothers or Rand Paul - (who is a Republican out of political necessity but holds largely libertarian views.) Many believe the government has no responsibility for the welfare of it's citizens other than to protect rights. eg: as Richard Weaver put it in his book "only individuals exist, therefore there is no such thing as the common good". For some it devolves into a type of social Darwinism - "every man for himself - let the weak get with the program or die off."

                    Many "small l" libertarians see the Libertarian Party as an ineffective way to advance these values and is basically a part of the same overall political system they deplore.

                    Murray Rothbard has probably had more influence than anyone in the modern libertarian movement. He has written lots of books but I found this one to be the most concise and readable:

                    Comment


                      #40
                      Originally posted by SaltwaterSlick View Post
                      My take is that we have allowed the gubment to claim Biblical terms for use in gubment laws and philosophy, and therein lies the big problem (for me personally at least). Some, even many, maybe most will disagree with me but my belief is that the term "marriage" is a God-given law and He clearly describes it in His Word as the union of one man and one woman, and the two when joined by Holy Matrimony become one flesh, inseparable in His eyes until at death they separate. The other big term that the gubment has claimed as its own that is a Biblical principle and defining principle is "life" itself. When as God has designed it an egg and a male spern are conjoined, that is the very conception of life and that fertilized mass is indeed a person with a soul that will live on for all eternity, a child of God.

                      These two issues alone would preclude and exclude me from ever joining with ANY group whether political or otherwise that does not support this or believe this as God's Law.

                      Please, I don't post this to start an argument or anything. It is what I believe, and I further believe that one cannot call themselves Christian if they believe otherwise.

                      XBowhunter, you posted the other day that you and I have a lot in common with respect to our beliefs, and this right here is the chasm that separates you and me. We have little to nothing in common if you are not a believer in God and in his Son as your savior. I don't mean that in a mean or disrespectful way at all. It is however my belief and I am forever given to that belief until the Lord calls me home.


                      I am saved

                      Comment


                        #41
                        Originally posted by LWC View Post
                        SS, I respect your beliefs and share some of them. But I don't want my government to be involved in my religious beliefs. I don't want them picking or choosing which religious beliefs to legislate (Christian or otherwise). Government should stay out of the religious bidness.


                        1000% agree !!!

                        Comment


                          #42
                          Originally posted by jerp View Post
                          The philosphy of libertarianism has many strains, some contradictory and far too diverse to fit on a party platform. There are left wing libertarians and right wing libertarians, some are pro life but most are pro choice, many are for open borders. All are for small government but some go as far as to say the only role of government is national defense and to protect individual rights. Some are mainstream guys like the Koch brothers or Rand Paul - (who is a Republican out of political necessity but holds largely libertarian views.) Many believe the government has no responsibility for the welfare of it's citizens other than to protect rights. eg: as Richard Weaver put it in his book "only individuals exist, therefore there is no such thing as the common good". For some it devolves into a type of social Darwinism - "every man for himself - let the weak get with the program or die off."



                          Many "small l" libertarians see the Libertarian Party as an ineffective way to advance these values and is basically a part of the same overall political system they deplore.



                          Murray Rothbard has probably had more influence than anyone in the modern libertarian movement. He has written lots of books but I found this one to be the most concise and readable:



                          https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_s...=138MAZQX5AJJ5


                          Thanks for your input

                          I added the book to my Amazon cart

                          Help me understand what you mean by double "small l" libertarians

                          Comment


                            #43
                            There are so many different labels within each party.

                            Southern Dem
                            JFK Dem
                            Left Dem
                            Radical
                            Eco
                            Conservative Dem
                            Central Dem
                            Union Dem
                            ......


                            Bible belt rep
                            Tea Party Rep
                            Right Wing Rep
                            Liberal Rep
                            Moderate Rep
                            Reagan Rep
                            ......

                            Comment


                              #44
                              Originally posted by XBowHunter View Post
                              I am saved
                              Thank you sir for telling me.

                              Is it a correct assumption that you believe in the sanctity of life and that marriage is between one man and one woman?

                              Thanks again for sharing.

                              Comment


                                #45
                                Originally posted by SaltwaterSlick View Post
                                Thank you sir for telling me.



                                Is it a correct assumption that you believe in the sanctity of life and that marriage is between one man and one woman?



                                Thanks again for sharing.


                                Those are my personal beliefs. however I don't believe the country should be run on my personal beliefs.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X