Reply
Go Back   TexasBowhunter.com Community Discussion Forums > Topics > Current Events - Politics and Such
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-13-2017, 10:09 PM   #101
flywise
Pope & Young
 
flywise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kempner,Tx
Hunt In: Blanco, Nacadoches,NewMexico,Colorado
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XBowHunter View Post
As a Christian, you don't want to have to be exposed to Muslim prayers, do you?

In other words you want freedom from others religions, so that you can have freedom of your religion.


In the same way an atheist might not want to be exposed to anyone's religion; muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Christian or Muslim
Then no, because athiest want their freedome from religion in order to prevent others from expressing their religion. When a Christian does not want to hear the muslim call to prayer they leave an area where it might be heard or they simply ignore it. When an athiest feels triggered by seeing a nativity scene they bring a lawsuit in order to prevent someone else from freely expressing theirs. Its impossible to have freedom from religion.
flywise is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-13-2017, 10:49 PM   #102
Black Ice
Pope & Young
 
Black Ice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Baton Rouge
Hunt In: Jefferson & Brooks County
Default Libertarians & Conservatives

Quote:
Originally Posted by XBowHunter View Post
So you disagree with the party platform, but call yourself libertarian anyway?


I disagree with anyone leaning too far one way or the other. At the end of the day I am for whatever protects the citizens of this country and puts more money in MY pocket as long as I work for it. I do have moral values that lean more towards the right but that is not my main focus.

Last edited by Black Ice; 03-13-2017 at 10:55 PM..
Black Ice is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 05:43 AM   #103
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flywise View Post
Then no, because athiest want their freedome from religion in order to prevent others from expressing their religion. When a Christian does not want to hear the muslim call to prayer they leave an area where it might be heard or they simply ignore it. When an athiest feels triggered by seeing a nativity scene they bring a lawsuit in order to prevent someone else from freely expressing theirs. Its impossible to have freedom from religion.


A libertarian believes a nativity scene on private property is not an issue.

When Christians try to force their nativity scenes on the public land/property is where problems start.
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 06:28 AM   #104
flywise
Pope & Young
 
flywise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kempner,Tx
Hunt In: Blanco, Nacadoches,NewMexico,Colorado
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XBowHunter View Post
A libertarian believes a nativity scene on private property is not an issue.

When Christians try to force their nativity scenes on the public land/property is where problems start.
Why do you always use the word force when referring to Christianity?
Gaining permission to put a Christian symbol on public property is not force.
When a local gov. Wants to put up a Christian symbol on public property it is not against the law or the constitution. The fact that a " libertarian " or athiest would rather not see it is the problem of the above mentioned. Why should the majority ( regardless if it consist of Christians or not) have to change or remove a symbol simply because a very small fraction insist on causing trouble?
There is no seperation of church and state in the constitution, a symbol does not inflict pain and suffering, the reason why this country suffers the ills of political correctness is because a very tiny minority of our population has created trouble where no trouble exist, and too many in the majority have allowed
It to take place
flywise is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 06:43 AM   #105
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flywise View Post
Why do you always use the word force when referring to Christianity?

Gaining permission to put a Christian symbol on public property is not force.

When a local gov. Wants to put up a Christian symbol on public property it is not against the law or the constitution. The fact that a " libertarian " or athiest would rather not see it is the problem of the above mentioned. Why should the majority ( regardless if it consist of Christians or not) have to change or remove a symbol simply because a very small fraction insist on causing trouble?

There is no seperation of church and state in the constitution, a symbol does not inflict pain and suffering, the reason why this country suffers the ills of political correctness is because a very tiny minority of our population has created trouble where no trouble exist, and too many in the majority have allowed

It to take place


So you have no problem with the church of Satan and the church of the flying spaghetti monster putting up their religious scenes right beside a nativity scene? Because that's what the law allows.

Do you want to see a scene from the church of Satan right next to your nativity scene? To me that's disgraceful for Christians, however...

The government should not be in the business of promoting anyone's religion
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 06:56 AM   #106
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default

By definition, libertarians welcome those of faith into the party.

But when those with faith try to legislate their religious beliefs they cease to be libertarian IMO
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 07:22 AM   #107
flywise
Pope & Young
 
flywise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kempner,Tx
Hunt In: Blanco, Nacadoches,NewMexico,Colorado
Default

This is America, in America there is the freedom of religion.
I dont want to see a satanic display but i dont have a choice but to accept it if one in placed on public ground next to a nativity scene. Id explain to my children that the folks were destined to an eternity in hell and that we should pray for them.
Allowing a symbols on public ground is not the promotion of those symbols.
I cant think of a piece of legislation where Christians tried
To force their views on the population. They have tried to pass legislation to remove laws that were forced on them against their will and beliefs. But i guess libertarians have no problems with any law that works against the Christian community.
flywise is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 07:49 AM   #108
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flywise View Post
This is America, in America there is the freedom of religion.
I dont want to see a satanic display but i dont have a choice but to accept it if one in placed on public ground next to a nativity scene. Id explain to my children that the folks were destined to an eternity in hell and that we should pray for them.
Allowing a symbols on public ground is not the promotion of those symbols.
I cant think of a piece of legislation where Christians tried
To force their views on the population. They have tried to pass legislation to remove laws that were forced on them against their will and beliefs. But i guess libertarians have no problems with any law that works against the Christian community.


So fighting same sex marriage & abortion are only trying to remove laws forced on them?

Sorry, I don't follow.

Back to the nativity scene. How about we just limit displays to private property? then there are no questions.
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 07:55 AM   #109
J Sweet
Pope & Young
 
J Sweet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: The Woodlands
Hunt In: Leon/Madsion County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XBowHunter View Post
A libertarian believes a nativity scene on private property is not an issue.
Quote:
Originally Posted by XBowHunter View Post
Back to the nativity scene. How about we just limit displays to private property? then there are no questions.
So we are in agreement you are not a libertarian. You are also upset on another thread that govt paid healthcare is going to be rolled back.
J Sweet is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 08:03 AM   #110
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J Sweet View Post
So we are in agreement you are not a libertarian. You are also upset on another thread that govt paid healthcare is going to be rolled back.


No we are not in agreement.

I am not 100% libertarian, but am mostly libertarian.


if you disagree with abortion and same-sex marriage in some states then you are not 100% libertarian either.
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 08:21 AM   #111
flywise
Pope & Young
 
flywise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kempner,Tx
Hunt In: Blanco, Nacadoches,NewMexico,Colorado
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XBowHunter View Post
So fighting same sex marriage & abortion are only trying to remove laws forced on them?

Sorry, I don't follow.

Back to the nativity scene. How about we just limit displays to private property? then there are no questions.
Absolutely, abortion was forced on the American people and Christians should not be forced to pay for them and before you say we dont, its very well established that we do.
Gay marriage was also forced on the American people by a supreme court creating rights that do not exist in the constitution. These two issues should be states rights issues and should be held to a vote by a States population
flywise is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 08:28 AM   #112
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flywise View Post
Absolutely, abortion was forced on the American people and Christians should not be forced to pay for them and before you say we dont, its very well established that we do.

Gay marriage was also forced on the American people by a supreme court creating rights that do not exist in the constitution. These two issues should be states rights issues and should be held to a vote by a States population


A libertarian view says marriage don't even belong with the government. Make it a legal, binding private contract.

We will have to disagree on who pays for abortion. Republicans have made sure those protections have been legislated.
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 09:00 AM   #113
SaltwaterSlick
Pope & Young
 
SaltwaterSlick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Default

XBow, please do not take what I post wrongly as I do not mean any disrespect or downcast toward you.
I have enjoyed this thread and literally everyone's input, but it is absolutely troubling to me. I AM a Christian, and I do my best to try to be a good steward of all that God provides me, and I do my best to follow the teachings of His Son Jesus Christ my Savior. I am human and I fail miserably at it sometimes. Sometimes what I do winds up hurting Him and I become a bad witness to Him with others. I feel this is one of those times. Much of my commentary on this thread has been given from not anger, but desperation and sorrow of sorts... I believe what the Bible teaches about right and wrong, and when I can, I try to share that belief. Sometimes that puts me in a bad light with others and does no good. Jesus teaches us to just sew the seed. He does not tell us that we must be successful. His Spirit will work in those whose hearts are softened by his Word and teaching from others. Others, it will not, but it is their choice. You see, God have us free will when He created us in His image. I have tried to share what I believe to be God's truth. I hope the things I have posted will be received as such, but there is absolutely no way I can square some of the things you posted with my beliefs. To me being a Christian, there is no separation of different parts of our lives whether we are at work, involved in the government, at play or whatever we do. Therefore I have no separation between government and my personal beliefs. I cannot and will not support the murder of a child inside its mother's womb no different than I can support the killing of innocent people in the Middle East and elsewhere by religious fanatics. They are the same thing. Once that embryo is fertilized and it becomes a baby, the mother's (and father's) rights are second to the life they have created. Their right to choose was BEFORE conception. This term "Marriage" is a biblical term that the government has chosen to adopt as its own. IF government wants to use that term, it must be used within the context from which it was created. It is the union of a man and a woman in Holy Matrimony and is the means by which we were instructed to populate the earth at Creation directly by God. In fact the Bible teaches that anything else is sin and a straight path to the gates of Hell. If the government wants to give rights to same sex partners in our legal system, they an call it a "contract", a "couple", or anything they deem OK, but it is NOT a marriage.

I will close by saying that I will pray for you personally and I hope you can be at peace within your own heart, but your words describe someone who is "broadminded" and to me that is a synonym for "sin". I doubt anything I post will have any affect on you or your beliefs, and I truly am sorry, but I was compelled to post.
SaltwaterSlick is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 09:27 AM   #114
J Sweet
Pope & Young
 
J Sweet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: The Woodlands
Hunt In: Leon/Madsion County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flywise View Post
Absolutely, abortion was forced on the American people and Christians should not be forced to pay for them and before you say we dont, its very well established that we do.
Gay marriage was also forced on the American people by a supreme court creating rights that do not exist in the constitution. These two issues should be states rights issues and should be held to a vote by a States population
So many liberal leaning "libertarians" that are all about government not interfering in private citizens business only now that that the government already did and made things the way they like them. As long as the status quo is liberal they are all about zero interference.
J Sweet is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 09:30 AM   #115
J Sweet
Pope & Young
 
J Sweet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: The Woodlands
Hunt In: Leon/Madsion County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XBowHunter View Post
No we are not in agreement.

I am not 100% libertarian, but am mostly libertarian.


if you disagree with abortion and same-sex marriage in some states then you are not 100% libertarian either.
Give this a read.

http://reason.com/blog/2015/08/14/so...-life-libertar


"From my perspective, the consistent libertarian position on abortion is contingent—it depends whether you believe the entity developing in the womb counts as a human being.

I accept that some people don't think it does. And if I were one of them, I'd probably be pro-choice too. Like many libertarians, a fundamental question I use to adjudicate whether an act should be considered a crime is whether or not it has a victim. Drug use? Consensual prostitution? Working for less than the wage some politician has decided should be the legislatively mandated minimum? I oppose government intervention to stop any of these things, because none of them involves the use of force by one human being against another.

But for the consistent libertarian who looks at an ultrasound and sees a baby, a person, a fully human life, it's extraordinarily hard to avoid the conclusion that abortion is an act of violence.
"
J Sweet is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 10:08 AM   #116
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SaltwaterSlick View Post
XBow, please do not take what I post wrongly as I do not mean any disrespect or downcast toward you.
I have enjoyed this thread and literally everyone's input, but it is absolutely troubling to me. I AM a Christian, and I do my best to try to be a good steward of all that God provides me, and I do my best to follow the teachings of His Son Jesus Christ my Savior. I am human and I fail miserably at it sometimes. Sometimes what I do winds up hurting Him and I become a bad witness to Him with others. I feel this is one of those times. Much of my commentary on this thread has been given from not anger, but desperation and sorrow of sorts... I believe what the Bible teaches about right and wrong, and when I can, I try to share that belief. Sometimes that puts me in a bad light with others and does no good. Jesus teaches us to just sew the seed. He does not tell us that we must be successful. His Spirit will work in those whose hearts are softened by his Word and teaching from others. Others, it will not, but it is their choice. You see, God have us free will when He created us in His image. I have tried to share what I believe to be God's truth. I hope the things I have posted will be received as such, but there is absolutely no way I can square some of the things you posted with my beliefs. To me being a Christian, there is no separation of different parts of our lives whether we are at work, involved in the government, at play or whatever we do. Therefore I have no separation between government and my personal beliefs. I cannot and will not support the murder of a child inside its mother's womb no different than I can support the killing of innocent people in the Middle East and elsewhere by religious fanatics. They are the same thing. Once that embryo is fertilized and it becomes a baby, the mother's (and father's) rights are second to the life they have created. Their right to choose was BEFORE conception. This term "Marriage" is a biblical term that the government has chosen to adopt as its own. IF government wants to use that term, it must be used within the context from which it was created. It is the union of a man and a woman in Holy Matrimony and is the means by which we were instructed to populate the earth at Creation directly by God. In fact the Bible teaches that anything else is sin and a straight path to the gates of Hell. If the government wants to give rights to same sex partners in our legal system, they an call it a "contract", a "couple", or anything they deem OK, but it is NOT a marriage.

I will close by saying that I will pray for you personally and I hope you can be at peace within your own heart, but your words describe someone who is "broadminded" and to me that is a synonym for "sin". I doubt anything I post will have any affect on you or your beliefs, and I truly am sorry, but I was compelled to post.


Correct, your words will not affect me. I have decided on religion, Jesus, politics and philosophy long ago.

I appreciate your concerns and beliefs, but to me they are much more personal to me.

God did in fact give us free will. I support a government that believes in personal freedoms and choices, just as god gave people choice.
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 10:11 AM   #117
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J Sweet View Post
So many liberal leaning "libertarians" that are all about government not interfering in private citizens business only now that that the government already did and made things the way they like them. As long as the status quo is liberal they are all about zero interference.


IMO, abortion is a personal choice between a woman, her doctor and her God.

The choice does not belong with any other people, including the govt.
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 10:19 AM   #118
J Sweet
Pope & Young
 
J Sweet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: The Woodlands
Hunt In: Leon/Madsion County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XBowHunter View Post
IMO, abortion is a personal choice between a woman, her doctor and her God.

The choice does not belong with any other people, including the govt.
That's fine. That's your opinion, you do not dictate to all libertarians what the libertarian position.

I have very few policy issues which I disagree with you on. My problem is you get into a liberal policy v conservative policy disagreement with guys on here and then state your position is the libertarian position when 100s of thousand if not millions of libertarians adamantly disagree with your position. Then members on here think that all libertarians are liberally leaning which they are not. Recently you led one member on here to conclude that libertarians are looking for a "socialist utopia". That's my problem. Even the title to this thread is an illogical statement. Conservatism and Libertarianism are not mutually exclusive.
J Sweet is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 10:19 AM   #119
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J Sweet View Post
Give this a read.



http://reason.com/blog/2015/08/14/so...-life-libertar





"From my perspective, the consistent libertarian position on abortion is contingent—it depends whether you believe the entity developing in the womb counts as a human being.



I accept that some people don't think it does. And if I were one of them, I'd probably be pro-choice too. Like many libertarians, a fundamental question I use to adjudicate whether an act should be considered a crime is whether or not it has a victim. Drug use? Consensual prostitution? Working for less than the wage some politician has decided should be the legislatively mandated minimum? I oppose government intervention to stop any of these things, because none of them involves the use of force by one human being against another.



But for the consistent libertarian who looks at an ultrasound and sees a baby, a person, a fully human life, it's extraordinarily hard to avoid the conclusion that abortion is an act of violence.

"


When someone wants to impose their beliefs on other people and prevent those people from life liberty and happiness then I have a problem.

The current law is abortion is legal and supported by the majority of the country.

For me, it's really simple;

If you don't approve of an abortion, don't get one.

If you don't approve of same sex marriage, don't get gay married
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 10:23 AM   #120
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J Sweet View Post
That's fine. That's your opinion, you do not dictate to all libertarians what the libertarian position.



I have very few policy issues which I disagree with you on. My problem is you get into a liberal policy v conservative policy disagreement with guys on here and then state your position is the libertarian position when 100s of thousand if not millions of libertarians adamantly disagree with your position. Then members on here think that all libertarians are liberally leaning which they are not. Recently you led one member on here to conclude that libertarians are looking for a "socialist utopia". That's my problem. Even the title to this thread is an illogical statement. Conservatism and Libertarianism are not mutually exclusive.


You are entitled to your opinion as well.

The official party platform for the Libertarian party disagrees with you on some things however.

Specifically dictating personal morals on people.

Just sayin, not trying to be disrespectful
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 10:41 AM   #121
J Sweet
Pope & Young
 
J Sweet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: The Woodlands
Hunt In: Leon/Madsion County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XBowHunter View Post
You are entitled to your opinion as well.

The official party platform for the Libertarian party disagrees with you on some things however.

Specifically dictating personal morals on people.

Just sayin, not trying to be disrespectful
The libertarian party is a political party created by left leaning libertarians. It is in no way the source of libertarian philosophies. I would argue that the majority of self described libertarians are not members of the libertarian party.

Also not being disrespectful. No idea why the other thread was deleted and this one hasn't been unless someone other than us two lost their mind on a rant and it was deleted before we saw it.
J Sweet is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 10:47 AM   #122
flywise
Pope & Young
 
flywise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kempner,Tx
Hunt In: Blanco, Nacadoches,NewMexico,Colorado
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J Sweet View Post
So many liberal leaning "libertarians" that are all about government not interfering in private citizens business only now that that the government already did and made things the way they like them. As long as the status quo is liberal they are all about zero interference.
Yes sir
flywise is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 10:48 AM   #123
Landrover
Pope & Young
 
Landrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Spring
Hunt In: Wherever & Whenever
Default

These are a few of the points that stood out for me also, but I was familiar with these statements since I was a kid. It is obvious that a few of the original framers were not die in the wool Christians but I wont ever submit that they did not believe in a HIGHER power. What is disappointing is that many Americans truly believe that all the framers walked on water and were devout Christians in the strictest sense...........NOT EVEN CLOSE! We were at the Jefferson Memorial last week and some of the documents on display were quite eye opening even for a man I would consider brilliant on soooo many levels, but he was a MAN!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vermin93 View Post
Indeed.

Frazer: Yeah; and, by the way, let me just say, one of the things that’s critical to note here as well is that I don’t make any claims concerning the founding fathers in general. I don’t think you can make any claims about what the founding fathers believed or the religion of the founding fathers in general because they were, just like people today, they were individuals who disagreed in a lot of ways. They didn’t share all the same beliefs; they held a diverse set of beliefs in various areas, so what I focus on is eight key individuals who I refer to as the key founders. That is, those who are most responsible for the two founding documents: the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. And John Adams is, of course, a key figure here because he was one of the three most responsible for the Declaration of Independence and, obviously, the second president of the United States, and also in other positions: vice president, ambassador to Europe and so forth. John Adams, I argue, is sort of the quintessential theistic rationalist. That is, he wrote the most about theology of any of the key founders and studied the most. He read any and all theology that he could find around the world and he wrote the most about it and revealed his own views the most, and it’s really quite shocking what he came up with. He fundamentally denied basically all the fundamental tenants of the faith. He was raised in a Calvinist community; although, and again this is where denominational affiliations can get you in trouble, his church was listed as Congregationalist and they kept that name, but the church turned Unitarian when he was a young man, and so just the label Congregationalist can get you sort of off-track. But he denied the deity of Christ; he denied the Trinity; he denied the atonement. He actually said what I think is the most striking statement of all the things that I’ve found in all of my study, which was in his explaining his opposition to the Trinity, he actually said that if he were standing on Mount Sinai with Moses, where God gives revelation, and God Himself told him that the Trinity was true, he said he wouldn’t believe it.

Mohler: You look at a statement like that and you think Thomas Payne; you don’t think John Adams.

Frazer: Right. He referred to the deity of Christ and the atonement as absurdities, talked about the fabrication of the Christian Trinity. He talked about the incarnation and said it has been the source of almost all the corruptions of Christianity—the belief in an eternal self-existent, omnipresent, omniscient Author of this stupendous universe suffering on a cross—says that that’s the source of most of the problems in Christianity. Speaking of the Bible, he said that philosophy is the original revelation of the Creator to His creature, and no subsequent revelation supported by prophecies or miracles can supersede it, so philosophy trumps the Bible.
Landrover is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 10:52 AM   #124
flywise
Pope & Young
 
flywise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kempner,Tx
Hunt In: Blanco, Nacadoches,NewMexico,Colorado
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XBowHunter View Post
IMO, abortion is a personal choice between a woman, her doctor and her God.

The choice does not belong with any other people, including the govt.
You left out....her baby daddy
The sperm doners should absolutely have a say in the decision.
Its half his, but at the moment he is not givin the benefit of his opinion.
Its her body not his the liberal minded will say but in reality she gave up full decision making about her body when she gave consent and got naked .
There are few exceptions to this as 99% of all abortions are a choice of convince.
flywise is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 10:54 AM   #125
J Sweet
Pope & Young
 
J Sweet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: The Woodlands
Hunt In: Leon/Madsion County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flywise View Post
Yes sir
A good indicator of how left leaning the Libertarian political party is the top leadership of the presidential campaign for the libertarian party endorsed Hilary Clinton for President of the US when interviewed as to who should get the nod.



http://www.mediaite.com/tv/gary-john...-be-president/
J Sweet is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 10:56 AM   #126
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J Sweet View Post
The libertarian party is a political party created by left leaning libertarians. It is in no way the source of libertarian philosophies. I would argue that the majority of self described libertarians are not members of the libertarian party.



Also not being disrespectful. No idea why the other thread was deleted and this one hasn't been unless someone other than us two lost their mind on a rant and it was deleted before we saw it.


I would argue that the majority of self described libertarians are not that familiar with the Libertarian party platform then.

You keep referring to liberal libertarians. I consider myself a "get your hands out of my life" libertarian. I believe most libertarians agree with that. Because that gets applied to same-sex marriage and abortion, I am viewed as liberal. I personally am not in favor of same-sex marriage or abortion, but I also don't believe it's my right to dictate those things to other people. That is a libertarian.

Libertarians are for individual freedoms.

Conservatives tend to be that way too, unless it gets into a couple of touchy areas for them. Areas that have a religious basis for them.

Libertarians leave choice up to the individual, as did God.
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 10:58 AM   #127
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flywise View Post
You left out....her baby daddy

The sperm doners should absolutely have a say in the decision.

Its half his, but at the moment he is not givin the benefit of his opinion.

Its her body not his the liberal minded will say but in reality she gave up full decision making about her body when she gave consent and got naked .

There are few exceptions to this as 99% of all abortions are a choice of convince.


When he decided not to wrap Jimmy up, he gave up his rights to the abortion decision IMO. He had a way to prevent it right from the beginning.

It's her body, it's her soul, it's her God & her decision.
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 11:10 AM   #128
flywise
Pope & Young
 
flywise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kempner,Tx
Hunt In: Blanco, Nacadoches,NewMexico,Colorado
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XBowHunter View Post
When he decided not to wrap Jimmy up, he gave up his rights to the abortion decision IMO. He had a way to prevent it right from the beginning.

It's her body, it's her soul, it's her God & her decision.
She had the obligation to require It but chose not to. He body her rules.
She can kill a living human fetus with out his imput but he has to pay child support for a kids d he may not have even known existed.

On another note, you claim you want gov out
Of everyones life as a libertarian, yet the other day you argued that a restaurant owner had no right to operate his business as he wanted to.
So speak out of both sides of your mouth. And typically, reguardless what you say you are you lean a long way to the left side of every debate.
flywise is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 11:18 AM   #129
J Sweet
Pope & Young
 
J Sweet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: The Woodlands
Hunt In: Leon/Madsion County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XBowHunter View Post
I would argue that the majority of self described libertarians are not that familiar with the Libertarian party platform then.

You keep referring to liberal libertarians. I consider myself a "get your hands out of my life" libertarian. I believe most libertarians agree with that. Because that gets applied to same-sex marriage and abortion, I am viewed as liberal. I personally am not in favor of same-sex marriage or abortion, but I also don't believe it's my right to dictate those things to other people. That is a libertarian.

Libertarians are for individual freedoms.

Conservatives tend to be that way too, unless it gets into a couple of touchy areas for them. Areas that have a religious basis for them.

Libertarians leave choice up to the individual, as did God.
Again, you are failing to understand that Libertarianism is a political philosophy and that conservatism is a social philosophy. They are not mutually exclusive. I am a conservative libertarian.

You are also conflating same sex marriage which is a civil rights issue and I agree with you on with abortion a "non aggression" issue which I do not agree with you on.

As a libertarian I believe the govt should protect my rights, one of those is against aggression. I should not be murdered by another person, nor should anyone. I believe that abortion on demand for the purpose of birth control as an oops moment is the unjustified killing of a human being. I get to this conclusion through the libertarian philosophy of non aggression. You and the libertarian party do not have to agree with me but you most certainly cannot tell me I am not a libertarian when I come to my conclusion strictly through libertarian philosophy.


Your default argument keeps going to "well that's what we libertarians believe, that's libertarianism". Two different people can apply the same principles to the same case and come up with different conclusions.
J Sweet is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 11:22 AM   #130
J Sweet
Pope & Young
 
J Sweet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: The Woodlands
Hunt In: Leon/Madsion County
Default

Xbow, non aggression is at the cornerstone of libertarian beliefs. Do you agree or disagree?

"Libertarianism is based on a single ideal, the non-aggression principle, so libertarian rhetoric tends to be remarkably consistent. Libertarians oppose the initiation of force to achieve social or political goals. They reject “first-strike” force, fraud or theft against others; they only use force in self-defense. Those who violate this “non-aggression principle” are expected to make their victims whole as much as possible."

https://www.theadvocates.org/aggression/
J Sweet is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 12:44 PM   #131
jerp
Pope & Young
 
jerp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Aledo
Hunt In: Shackleford Co.
Default

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

These words seem to be pretty simple but if you Google "original meaning of the establishment clause" you will get page after page of scholarly commentary and the opinions are all over the place. This is mostly because of the tension between "no establishment" and the "free exercise" clause. Which is most important? What exactly constitutes establishment and what is merely free exercise? It is a very blurry line.

We must remember that at the founding, 6 of the original states had established churches. (eg: Anglican ministers were paid from state coffers in Virginia.) The founders wanted to make it clear there would be no nationally established religion and the constitution would forbid government preference among religions. I don't know anyone who would disagree with that, and prefer a theocracy.

The problem is, the definition of establishment has been stretched - now it is commonly believed that if a lawmaker is influenced by his faith when forming an opinions on policy, that is somehow government "establishing a religion." What difference does it make if one's opinions are formed by the Bible, the Bhagavad Gita, the Communist Manifesto or old reruns of "The Love Boat?" Let's say Dave thinks abortion is bad because of the Bible and Larry thinks abortion is bad but he is an atheist and a believer in secular humanism. Is Dave's support of a law against abortion then unconstitutional while Larry's is not? Many seem to think that if a law is even tangentially based on a biblical principle it is automatically unconstitutional. There are plenty of non-believers who are pro-life, pro-traditional marriage and hold other traditionally conservative views - they just came to those beliefs without the help of the Bible.

Last edited by jerp; 03-14-2017 at 12:49 PM..
jerp is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 12:49 PM   #132
flywise
Pope & Young
 
flywise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kempner,Tx
Hunt In: Blanco, Nacadoches,NewMexico,Colorado
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jerp View Post
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

These words seem to be pretty simple but if you Google "original meaning of the establishment clause" you will get page after page of scholarly commentary and the opinions are all over the place. This is mostly because of the tension between "no establishment" and the "free exercise" clause. Which is most important? What exactly constitutes establishment and what is merely free exercise? It is a very blurry line.

We must remember that at the founding, 6 of the original states had established churches. (eg: Anglican ministers were paid from state coffers in Virginia.) The founders wanted to make it clear there would be no nationally established religion and the constitution would forbid government preference among religions. I don't know anyone who would disagree with that, and prefer a theocracy.

The problem is, the definition of establishment has been stretched - now it is commonly believed that if a lawmaker is influenced by his faith when forming an opinions on policy, that is somehow government "establishing a religion." What difference does it make if one's opinions are formed by the Bible, the Bhagavad Gita, the Communist Manifesto or old reruns of "The Love Boat" Let's say Dave thinks murder is bad because of the 10 Commandments and Larry thinks murder is bad because of a belief in the philosophy of secular humanism. Is Dave's support of a law against murder then unconstitutional while Larry's is not? Many seem to think that if a law is even tangentially based on a biblical principle it is automatically unconstitutional. There are plenty of non-believers who are pro-life, pro-traditional marriage and hold other traditionally conservative views - they just came to those beliefs without the help of the Bible.
I always respect and appreciate how well you and Shane present opinions.
flywise is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 01:17 PM   #133
J Sweet
Pope & Young
 
J Sweet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: The Woodlands
Hunt In: Leon/Madsion County
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jerp View Post
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

These words seem to be pretty simple but if you Google "original meaning of the establishment clause" you will get page after page of scholarly commentary and the opinions are all over the place. This is mostly because of the tension between "no establishment" and the "free exercise" clause. Which is most important? What exactly constitutes establishment and what is merely free exercise? It is a very blurry line.

We must remember that at the founding, 6 of the original states had established churches. (eg: Anglican ministers were paid from state coffers in Virginia.) The founders wanted to make it clear there would be no nationally established religion and the constitution would forbid government preference among religions. I don't know anyone who would disagree with that, and prefer a theocracy.

The problem is, the definition of establishment has been stretched - now it is commonly believed that if a lawmaker is influenced by his faith when forming an opinions on policy, that is somehow government "establishing a religion." What difference does it make if one's opinions are formed by the Bible, the Bhagavad Gita, the Communist Manifesto or old reruns of "The Love Boat?" Let's say Dave thinks abortion is bad because of the Bible and Larry thinks abortion is bad but he is an atheist and a believer in secular humanism. Is Dave's support of a law against abortion then unconstitutional while Larry's is not? Many seem to think that if a law is even tangentially based on a biblical principle it is automatically unconstitutional. There are plenty of non-believers who are pro-life, pro-traditional marriage and hold other traditionally conservative views - they just came to those beliefs without the help of the Bible.
Good point Jerp, you will always hear many people state that the constitution specifically mandates a separation of church and state. No where is there such a clause, it is I guess a poor paraphrasing of the establishment clause yet a large segment of our population will argue its existence.
J Sweet is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 01:51 PM   #134
flywise
Pope & Young
 
flywise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kempner,Tx
Hunt In: Blanco, Nacadoches,NewMexico,Colorado
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J Sweet View Post
Good point Jerp, you will always hear many people state that the constitution specifically mandates a separation of church and state. No where is there such a clause, it is I guess a poor paraphrasing of the establishment clause yet a large segment of our population will argue its existence.
That misconception is from a letter written by ( I believe) jefferson in response to a letter he recieved from a preacher. Somehow some folks want to use that as a constitutional decree ( for lack of a better word)
flywise is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 01:56 PM   #135
J Sweet
Pope & Young
 
J Sweet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: The Woodlands
Hunt In: Leon/Madsion County
Default

Ladies and Gentlemen, I submit to you exhibit A. "Libertarians and Conservatives" A political thread on TBH where all members are handling themselves in a proper and most distinguished manner while providing an informative and substantive discussion for all.

Proof that in fact the PACE serves a viable purpose here on TBH.
J Sweet is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 01:57 PM   #136
flywise
Pope & Young
 
flywise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kempner,Tx
Hunt In: Blanco, Nacadoches,NewMexico,Colorado
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J Sweet View Post
Ladies and Gentlemen, I submit to you exhibit A. "Libertarians and Conservatives" A political thread on TBH where all members are handling themselves in a proper and most distinguished manner while providing an informative and substantive discussion for all.

Proof that in fact the PACE serves a viable purpose here on TBH.
Agreed
flywise is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 01:59 PM   #137
SaltwaterSlick
Pope & Young
 
SaltwaterSlick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Default

OKay.......

Now can we let loose?
SaltwaterSlick is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 03:42 PM   #138
Vermin93
Eight Point
 
Vermin93's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Addison, TX
Hunt In: North TX, OK, TN
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jerp View Post
The problem is, the definition of establishment has been stretched - now it is commonly believed that if a lawmaker is influenced by his faith when forming an opinions on policy, that is somehow government "establishing a religion." What difference does it make if one's opinions are formed by the Bible, the Bhagavad Gita, the Communist Manifesto or old reruns of "The Love Boat?" Let's say Dave thinks abortion is bad because of the Bible and Larry thinks abortion is bad but he is an atheist and a believer in secular humanism. Is Dave's support of a law against abortion then unconstitutional while Larry's is not? Many seem to think that if a law is even tangentially based on a biblical principle it is automatically unconstitutional. There are plenty of non-believers who are pro-life, pro-traditional marriage and hold other traditionally conservative views - they just came to those beliefs without the help of the Bible.
I agree, but the problem cuts both ways.

Regarding your last comment, there's no doubt such people exist, but I'm personally aware of very few of them. I think it would be difficult to argue that Biblical influence isn't the primary driver and uniting force behind the pro-life and traditional marriage movements in the US.

These days I find it frustrating that abortion and same-sex marriage are commonly lumped together in social debates. I'm not sure if this is to the advantage of the Christian right or the secular left, but the combination is a rallying point for both sides in American politics. I will say that as a recovering social conservative, I find myself giving these two distinctly different issues separate and, in my opinion, more reasoned consideration these days. Dang, it feels good to break the mental chains.
Vermin93 is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 04:31 PM   #139
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flywise View Post
She had the obligation to require It but chose not to. He body her rules.

She can kill a living human fetus with out his imput but he has to pay child support for a kids d he may not have even known existed.



On another note, you claim you want gov out

Of everyones life as a libertarian, yet the other day you argued that a restaurant owner had no right to operate his business as he wanted to.

So speak out of both sides of your mouth. And typically, reguardless what you say you are you lean a long way to the left side of every debate.


I feel like it's a privilege to do business in this country. And there are a few prices to pay, like getting a business license, paying taxes and not discriminating.

Those are just my opinions


Are you conservative or are you libertarian?
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 04:36 PM   #140
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J Sweet View Post
Again, you are failing to understand that Libertarianism is a political philosophy and that conservatism is a social philosophy. They are not mutually exclusive. I am a conservative libertarian.



You are also conflating same sex marriage which is a civil rights issue and I agree with you on with abortion a "non aggression" issue which I do not agree with you on.



As a libertarian I believe the govt should protect my rights, one of those is against aggression. I should not be murdered by another person, nor should anyone. I believe that abortion on demand for the purpose of birth control as an oops moment is the unjustified killing of a human being. I get to this conclusion through the libertarian philosophy of non aggression. You and the libertarian party do not have to agree with me but you most certainly cannot tell me I am not a libertarian when I come to my conclusion strictly through libertarian philosophy.





Your default argument keeps going to "well that's what we libertarians believe, that's libertarianism". Two different people can apply the same principles to the same case and come up with different conclusions.


We as libertarians will never be able to unite and agree on a candidate then.

I refuse to vote for any candidate that wants to legislate their religious beliefs on the country, and likewise I assume you would not vote for someone who was pro-choice.

By drawing that conclusion, libertarianism has no chance in this country, at least not at uniting social conservatives with libertarians who more closely align with the party platform.
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 04:37 PM   #141
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J Sweet View Post
Xbow, non aggression is at the cornerstone of libertarian beliefs. Do you agree or disagree?



"Libertarianism is based on a single ideal, the non-aggression principle, so libertarian rhetoric tends to be remarkably consistent. Libertarians oppose the initiation of force to achieve social or political goals. They reject “first-strike” force, fraud or theft against others; they only use force in self-defense. Those who violate this “non-aggression principle” are expected to make their victims whole as much as possible."



https://www.theadvocates.org/aggression/


I know where you're going and You will not convince me that some people should not have the right to an abortion, sorry.
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 04:40 PM   #142
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J Sweet View Post
Ladies and Gentlemen, I submit to you exhibit A. "Libertarians and Conservatives" A political thread on TBH where all members are handling themselves in a proper and most distinguished manner while providing an informative and substantive discussion for all.



Proof that in fact the PACE serves a viable purpose here on TBH.


Pretty wild, Huh?


Lol!!!'
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 04:45 PM   #143
Landrover
Pope & Young
 
Landrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Spring
Hunt In: Wherever & Whenever
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vermin93 View Post
I agree, but the problem cuts both ways.
Dang, it feels good to break the mental chains.
These two sentences are pure GREATNESS!!!
Truth.........definitely cuts both ways.
And YES,......the mental chains were released from my soul about 10 years ago........never going back to political dogma just because it is considered in vogue, traditional or "just the way it has always been!" All the philosophies have serious gaps which have been exposed continuously over the last few decades!
Landrover is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 04:57 PM   #144
flywise
Pope & Young
 
flywise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kempner,Tx
Hunt In: Blanco, Nacadoches,NewMexico,Colorado
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XBowHunter View Post
I feel like it's a privilege to do business in this country. And there are a few prices to pay, like getting a business license, paying taxes and not discriminating.

Those are just my opinions


Are you conservative or are you libertarian?
So, your libertarianism only goes so far.....I understand.
Its a privilege just being in this country, starting a business is not a privilege, its a risk. Typically taking that risk is with full knowledge what the rules are. But when the gov. Changes those rules when ever they feel like catering to the next social justice warrior coming down the pike it puts even more risk to the owner.
Business should succeed or fail on their ability to perform in the market place not whether or not they can keep up with gov. Social justice mandates.
flywise is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 05:17 PM   #145
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default Libertarians & Conservatives

Quote:
Originally Posted by flywise View Post
So, your libertarianism only goes so far.....I understand.

Its a privilege just being in this country, starting a business is not a privilege, its a risk. Typically taking that risk is with full knowledge what the rules are. But when the gov. Changes those rules when ever they feel like catering to the next social justice warrior coming down the pike it puts even more risk to the owner.

Business should succeed or fail on their ability to perform in the market place not whether or not they can keep up with gov. Social justice mandates.


Years ago I could've gone along with businesses making their own decisions. But with the bigotry and division I see in our culture of these days, I'm not sure the American public is trustworthy enough to put bigoted or racist businesses out of business.

And that would lead to segregation not the United States.

So I draw the line when conservatives want to implement policies that could be discriminating to a lot of the population
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 05:39 PM   #146
flywise
Pope & Young
 
flywise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kempner,Tx
Hunt In: Blanco, Nacadoches,NewMexico,Colorado
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XBowHunter View Post
Years ago I could've gone along with businesses making their own decisions. But with the bigotry and division I see in our culture of these days, I'm not sure the American public is trustworthy enough to put bigoted or racist businesses out of business.

And that would lead to segregation not the United States.

So I draw the line when conservatives want to implement policies that could be discriminating to a lot of the population
You really need to quit blaming everything on Christians and conservatives.
This quote is pure ignorance. Businesses will not be in business if they are raciest or bigoted. Thats the point. You seem to think a large percentage of this American population is living in 1950, well guess what? Its a figment of your liberal imagination.
Refusing to bake a cake is not bigotry, nor is refusing to take photographs, or make a pizza for gay weddings. Liberals love and insist on infringing on a christians rights and then accuse them for trying to force their faith on you.
Its classic liberal socialism , blame them for something you are actually doing

Last edited by flywise; 03-14-2017 at 05:42 PM..
flywise is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 05:45 PM   #147
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default Libertarians & Conservatives

Quote:
Originally Posted by flywise View Post
You really need to quit blaming everything on Christians and conservatives.
This quote is pure ignorance. Businesses will not be in business if they are raciest or bigoted. Thats the point. You seem to think a large percentage of this American population is living in 1950, well guess what? Its a figment of your liberal imagination.
Refusing to bake a cake is not bigotry, nor is refusing to take photographs, or make a pizza for gay weddings. Liberals love and insist on infringing on a christians rights and then accuse them for trying to force their faith on you.
Its classic liberal socialism , blame them for something you are actually doing


Should restaurants also be allowed to refuse service to blacks? Muslims?


We as a society have already fought this battle. Get over it. We as a country are not going to allow legal discrimination.
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 05:54 PM   #148
flywise
Pope & Young
 
flywise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Kempner,Tx
Hunt In: Blanco, Nacadoches,NewMexico,Colorado
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by XBowHunter View Post
Should restaurants also be allowed to refuse service to blacks? Muslims?


We as a society have already fought this battle. Get over it. We as a country are not going to allow legal discrimination.
Should they be allowed to? No business is going to do that and stay in business.
Im talking about gov. Regulation. You say you want gov. Out of the lives of the American people yet you want gov. to regulate every aspect of business, healthcare, bathrooms and force people to comply with the demand of a gay couples wedding.
flywise is online now   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 05:58 PM   #149
XBowHunter
Pope & Young
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Grayson County
Hunt In: Grayson/Cass
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flywise View Post
Should they be allowed to? No business is going to do that and stay in business.

Im talking about gov. Regulation. You say you want gov. Out of the lives of the American people yet you want gov. to regulate every aspect of business, healthcare, bathrooms and force people to comply with the demand of a gay couples wedding.


I asked you if businesses should be allowed to reject blacks and Muslims? Not whether they stay in business.

Should a cake maker be able to deny business to two blacks? Or Muslims?

I have no doubt there are small towns in rural America where a business could stay in operation with rules such as that. In a larger city they wouldn't last two seconds.
XBowHunter is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Old 03-14-2017, 06:10 PM   #150
J Sweet
Pope & Young
 
J Sweet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: The Woodlands
Hunt In: Leon/Madsion County
Default Libertarians & Conservatives

Quote:
Originally Posted by XBowHunter View Post
We as libertarians will never be able to unite and agree on a candidate then.

I refuse to vote for any candidate that wants to legislate their religious beliefs on the country, and likewise I assume you would not vote for someone who was pro-choice.

By drawing that conclusion, libertarianism has no chance in this country, at least not at uniting social conservatives with libertarians who more closely align with the party platform.


I voted Republican. No way was I voting fir Gary Johnson. Looks like large majority of Libertarians vote Republican.

https://www.cato.org/publications/co...bertarian-vote

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Last edited by J Sweet; 03-14-2017 at 06:20 PM..
J Sweet is offline   Reply With Quote Back To The Top
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2012, TexasBowhunter.com