Originally posted by: bamacre
Originally posted by: Evan
Originally posted by: bamacre
There is a HUGE difference between Anarchism and Libertarianism.
Originally posted by: Evan
Yes, you really are. Libertarians are nowhere near socially progressive.
Most Libertarians are socially liberal. All should be.
Huh? Libertarians are uniformly pro-life (either straight out or via state decision),
The Federal government doesn't, or rather shouldn't, have jurisdiction to rule over abortion. This should be a state issue. This is perhaps one issue where there would be a difference of opinion between some Libertarians. Personally, I do not like abortion, but politically I support a woman's right to choose. And I don't think banning abortions works, just like banning anything else.
This is just a totally ridiculous statement to make. I mean, WTF do you even mean here? I personally support the right of homosexuals to marry, but I do think this is also a state issue, for the same reason above, the federal government has no jurisdiction here. This is a state issue.
But to use the term "anti-gay?" I mean WTF?
Yes, all Libertarians support the Bill of Rights, all 10 of them.
Uhhh, anti-
illegal immigrant. Big difference.
That is nowhere near resembling socially progressive.
There is a big difference between socially liberal and socially progressive.
Where are the social progressives when it comes to my right to gamble online? My right to smoke marijuana in the privacy of my own home?
They're nowhere to be found.
That's because social libertarianism is based on the ideas of personal choice and personal responsibility, and social progressives desire to shift the powers of choice and responsibility to government.
Or to put it simply, they like to take away one's freedoms and liberties and call it progress. To which I say, "no thanks."