re: If someone tells you they’re a Libertarian

quote:

---

It's demonstrably false. We don't live in a theocracy and there's no major push for one. The closest we ever came to one was right after our founding, and just about every major move since then has been in the opposite direction

---

Prohibition says hi

Perhaps clarification could be had by listening to the radio show Free Talk Live narrated by those of the ideology who are so frantic and concerned about their safety that they decided to broadcast, allegedly, from the safe confines of Saipan.

quote:

---

Prohibition says hi

---

So do the words "just about".

quote:

---

I said evangelicals don’t believe that people should have free will because they often legislate arbitrary restrictions of freedom based on biblical morality.

---

The evangelical Louisiana Family Forum loves legislating their morality. Imagine the cesspool of sin that LA would be if they allowed Daily Fantasy Sports.

It’s the most pure form without going overboard. I feel it’s the best balance between parties. I’m not saying that I agree with everything that that label comes with. But I fall into that category for the majority of my beliefs. For the most part, if an action does not cause physical harm to another person, I feel like it’s a dumb law. I know there’s a lot of gray area with that statement, but what a person chooses to do with themselves I feel like is their business. And laws should never be based on morality, unless again, it causes direct physical harm to someone.

quote:

---

There’s a bigly difference between “morality” activities only effecting the consenting persons who partake in it and “morality” which involves voiding consent of a party.

---

Why do I need his consent to have an orgy in a public park? It's none of his libertarian business, correct?

Libertarians don’t believe in public parks, that park systems would be more efficient and offer superior services if privately run for profit.

The libertarian creed is essentially:
If government didn’t do it, would you pay someone for it?
If no, then government shouldn’t do it because it’s not worth a shitte.
If yes, then government isn’t needed to do it because enough demand exists for the free market to step in and fill the void if government stopped doing it.

An orgy, assuming all parties are consenting adults capable of giving consent, is not illegal. The only potential issue is location.

As for the right to hold an orgy in a given location, a park, you would have to take that up with the property owner. Whoever owns the property gets to decide who can do what on that property. A public park is owned by the people, who allow themselves to be represented by a government. So, whether or not you can have an orgy in a public park would be up to whatever government organization manages said park, but in a perfect libertarian land, there would be no public park and the private park owner would have the final say.

Anarchists and libertarians are not the same thing, though there is some significant crossover.

Anarchists want no government. Libertarians want less government. Small potatoes distinction when our present government is so large, but the desired end results are VERY different.

I’d ask them what they think libertarian means since a lot of people don’t seem to know. I’ve seen so many Bernie bro types say that they’re libertarians which is the opposite of what Bernie is.

Bernie is pretty decent on individual liberty, but a monster on economic liberty. The problem is too many people don’t understand that there can be no one without the other.