Why libertarianism isn't conservatism

Back later with libertarian economic policies. What's not to love about the libertarian view of "property rights" and "buyer beware"? We'll see what's not to love about those selfish and destructive ideologies later.

 

Ok, you said they left the party, which made me wonder.

Well, Biden supports gay marriage too, as do the libertarian candidates so how could Trumps populist stance get libertarian votes when everyone says they are supporters. Actually Trump said he was for "traditional marriage". Besides, libertarians dont "support" homosexuality, they simply don't want the government involved in such issues, and that included abortion, and Trump played the "pro life" card heavily to get the evangelical votes. So, I'm not sold on the claim that libertarians voter for either Biden or Trump.

His immigration policy and trade policy was as non-libertarian as can be.

Who told you they voted for Biden or Trump? I dont see any reason why they would do that.

 

So first you call me an atheist when I gave you scripture that conflicted with your made up beliefs - in a desperate attempt to demonize the messenger - cause you can't handle the message - in a desperate dance of denial - while claiming that others are in denial.

Now you call me a homosexual - because I showed that your scriptural claims were false .

Not saying that you are a member of a destructive cult - but "demonization of the other" .. when used as a thought stopping technique - cause the adherent can not deal with the "bad thought" - anything that conflicts with cult dogma - is a symptom that sophisticated mind control techniques were in play.

Don't engage in these kind mind twisting games - down the dark path it leads.

 

You do see the irony in this?

 

Numbers 5 - Then the Lord said to Moses, 12 “Speak to the Israelites and say to them: ‘If a man’s wife goes astray and is unfaithful to him 13 so that another man has sexual relations with her, and this is hidden from her husband and her impurity is undetected (since there is no witness against her and she has not been caught in the act), 14 and if feelings of jealousy come over her husband and he suspects his wife and she is impure—or if he is jealous and suspects her even though she is not impure— 15 then he is to take his wife to the priest"

What follows is a fairly detailed ritual finishing with - . "22 May this water that brings a curse enter your body so that your abdomen swells or your womb miscarries.”

So .. if pregnant by another man -- you go see priest - gives you a potion which causes an abortion .. problem solved.

 

The gruesome purity test. Now there's some good old fashioned witchcraft.

 

That, or this: “‘If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress are to be put to death."

 

To be perfectly honest, I didn't bother to read your post about Kirk and I'm not interested in talking about Chesterson. As I mentioned earlier I brought neither one of them up and I don't claim to be an expert on either man and their philosophical beliefs. All I know about Kirk is the list of 10 principles of conservatism that Mike pointed out and that Chesterson wrote the Father Brown detective series that my wife likes to watch on TV.

Of course all deists didn't/don't, but what about the title of Jefferson's compilation (not to mention the contents) sticks out like a sore thumb? Could it be the fact that he refers to Jesus as Jesus of Nazareth - a historical figure - instead of Jesus Christ - a religious figure, the Messiah, the Son of God?

And what else about Jefferson's collection of selected works from the Gospels should have caught your attention and given you pause?

The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth
The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth, known today as The Jefferson Bible, is Thomas Jefferson's own compilation of the four gospels in the New Testament. Jefferson cut out excerpts from six New Testament volumes in English, French, Latin, and Greek, and then assembled them together in this single volume. He arranged his chosen passages to create a chronological account of Jesus' life, parables, and moral teachings. He omitted passages that he deemed insupportable through reason or that he believed were later embellishments, including references to Jesus' miracles and his resurrection. In doing so, Jefferson sought to clarify Jesus' moral teachings, which he believed provided "the most sublime and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man."...

https://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/life-and-morals-jesus-nazareth

Ruh-roh! Looks like you've got a little problem there, but the title, contents and omissions in Jefferson's book are consistent with his deist beliefs:

Jefferson's Religious Beliefs
Thomas Jefferson’s religious beliefs have long been a subject of public discussion, and were a critical topic in several of his important political campaigns as he was viciously and unfairly attacked for alleged atheism.

Jefferson took the issue of religion very seriously. A man of the Enlightenment, he certainly applied to himself the advice which he gave to his nephew Peter Carr in 1787: "Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because, if there be one, he must more approve the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear."1Jefferson read broadly on the topic, including studying different religions, and while he often claimed that religion was a private matter “between Man & his God,” he frequently discussed religion...

https://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/jeffersons-religious-beliefs

This is a man you claim ardently embraces Judeo-Christian doctrine?

Good luck with that. You most certainly have failed to convince me of such.

There's no need to thank me for something I never did, and putting words in other people's mouths is dishonest, lame and displays an inability on your part to support your own positions. I hope you can do better in the future.

Now, let's look at what I actually I did/said:

Clearly, I did not state that the DOI is "biblically based" nor did I state that the Preamble is "biblically based". What I stated was that Jefferson did not come up with any of the three elements in the Preamble that I cited, and that one of those elements - the idea that all men are created equal - can be traced back to Jesus. Furthermore, I did not trace that to the Bible for a reason.

No, we cannot and do not agree, in no small part because I find your "logic" fallacious. I consider legislating the actual act of legislating, so not legislating does not qualify as legislating.

First of all, it is your opinion whether you choose to acknowledge it or not. Secondly, I don't agree with libertarians and most particularly Libertarians on everything, so I don't claim to be a libertarian. Finally, as for whether or not a culture that denounces homosexuality, abortion, recreational drug use, pornography, prostittuion (sic) comes from the Bible, that may or not be true -



What's this - Jesus turning water into wine?

Oh, the horror...

Your opinion is, well, your opinion, but I think it's safe to presume that your opinion isn't shared by most conservatives.

Where does that leave you? Outside the mainstream of conservative thought.

You didn't ask me where those foundations came from - you asked me "Did the above just think up where rights come from or did they use some foundation for their beliefs?" and I replied "Foundations, plural".

Now, if you want to know where those foundations came from I'd be glad to answer that question for you because I can answer it for you, and if you're interested in exploring those foundations in depth, I'll be glad to recommend this book to you - I think every libertarian and conservative should read it:



And if the subject really interests you, I would recommend reading this book, as well:

 

Oddly enough.. on that count, I just had an hour long conversation with o0ne of my clients... quick story
He was rear ended by a PU going 100 mph, pancaked the bed of his truck, because spent a year in and out of the hospital, w they found he had prostrate cancer, spent month more going through chemo and got rid of the cancer in his prostrate.. BUT it messed with his natular enteric bacteria and messed up his digestive system and even flowed down to cause serios pain in his legs and feet,... soo they were treating the symptoms/ medical conditions brought on by chemo , when he got knocked down by what he is very sure was Covid.. severe symptoms for 11 days, his only therapy was the effort he had to make to feed his animals. After the worse of the Covid symptoms passed.. he realised the bloating caused by the aftermath of chemo, and which was not responding to treatment, had gone. Along strange trip, but he'd more than likely have died of cancer had he not been in the wreck that sent him to the hospital.

 

As for libertarianism.. I looked at it long and hard, but I found it was unworkable when taken to the extremes, couldn't hold up the principles when taken to the extreme.. for example a buddy of mine was so happy when they started legalising pot, but contrary to libertarian principles, he never complained about the Govt taxing it.
So I went Conservative.. it will still work even when put under extreme conditions and cases. i.e. there is a solid conservative and unwavering answer to everything.

 

The difference is that in the case of the "Put to death" the adulterer(s) have been caught -- in the case of the abortion the woman has not been caught - is just on the basis of the suspicion of the husband .. that wife has been a naughty girl .

 

Witch Procedure -- Put head of the "suspected" Witch under water for 10 minutes - if dies - was a witch

 

Her pregnancy tends to prove that she has been up to something. No?

But sure, the Mosaic law has all kinds of rules and exceptions to the rules.

 

It would only follow if they had a federal hierarchy unifying the union and became the United States of Europe.

 

and contradictions. The Israelites never followed these rules -- doubtful if they existed as such - 10 commandents yes .. the Law stuff comes from the dudes who were legalistic . Deuteronomy Source ..and perhaps some stuff was older but much was what that particular sect practiced.. the Jahwist and Elohist sources are different .. all spliced together in what we have today .. Priestly source as well. .. its why we have different versions of the same story .. the sacrifice of Issac being one example -- creation story another -

Why we have one law saying "Children are not to be killed for sins of the parents" another commanding children be killed for the sins of their parents depends on which Tribe you asked what "The Law" was.

Now the folks that put the bible togethere was the goat herder tribe .. While Northern Israel was sacked by the Assyrians around 700 BC - and Israel as the people know it dissappeared - all that was left was the area round Jerusalem which no one really wanted or bothered with.. Population of the northern kingdom estimated at over 40,000 .. "Judah" the southern kingdom around 2000.

So this obscure tribe carried on for another century or so .. and then it was wiped out by Babylon .. After some 60-80 years in captivity .. the remnents of who knows what cobble together under Persian Rule and start a new religion .. This new religion is little like the old religion .. being the introduction of Monotheism into doctrine.

 

It falls under a libertarian's view of property rights. Granted, there are certain things that are legitimate with "Buyer Beware" (caveat emptor), like selling a broken down lawnmower to someone who wants to fix it up (as long as he knows that it needs substantial repair), but going into a business that doesn't meet health and safety standards could also fall under a libertarian's idea of "Buyer Beware".

Let's look at how libertarians view property rights:

"As respect for property rights is fundamental to maintaining a free and prosperous society, it follows that the freedom to contract to obtain, retain, profit from, manage, or dispose of one’s property must also be upheld. Libertarians would free property owners from government restrictions on their rights to control and enjoy their property, as long as their choices do not harm or infringe on the rights of others..."
Platform | Libertarian Party (lp.org)

When Joe Bob's brother in law Mel built Joe Bob's restaurant (Mel took a woodshop class in 9th grade, so he had to know what he was doing), Mel assured Joe Bob that the property was safe for others to inhabit. Hence the last sentence of the above paragraph is subjective.

I'm interested in your thoughts about property rights, from a libertarian perspective of course.

 

LOL - I do.

 

Yeah, you might say that morally depraved ideology put into action is "extreme".

You have to hand it to your drug pushing friend: He does know that those taxes are going to things that are necessary in a pro libertarian society: More police, drug rehabilitation centers, things that come with a depraved society.

 

Pardon me for interrupting, but 1) ChiCowboy isn't a libertarian, and 2) you're looking at how Libertarians view property rights, not libertarians.

Thought you should know. Carry on...

 

All it would take would be some coordination and cooperation and the will to do it. It’s THEIR continent. They should defend it.

 

Kirk abhorred libertarianism, as did Chesterson...honest.

Which was written for the American Indian (Jefferson referred to them as "savages" for a reason), in hope that they would discontinue in their barbaric practices.
The Truth Concerning the Jefferson Bible - Christian Heritage Fellowship, Inc.

Now about that document regarding man's rights coming from God (It's called "The Declaration of Independence" and reference to God was made in it at least 4 times something that you won't find in any libertarian doctrine, in fact libertarians speak out against God:

"Consequently, we defend each person’s right to engage in any activity that is peaceful and honest, and welcome the diversity that freedom brings. The world we seek to build is one where individuals are free to follow their own dreams in their own ways, without interference from government or any authoritarian power."

Let's just say that if ole Thom were alive today, he wouldn't be nominated for President on the Libertarian Party ticket.

I'll be sure to let you know when I'm here to try and convince evil to be good. My posts are for those who are interested in the truth, not those who embrace evil, which libertarianism is.

First of all, you don't have to dish out the 25 cent membership fee that the Libertarian Party requires in order to embrace libertarian ideology. If you weren't a libertarian, you wouldn't have put so much effort into your posts. Be proud that you support an ideology and political movement that destroys lives, as you're getting back at a society that allowed yours to be destroyed. Satan thanks you.

I used the word "foundation" (singular) because it's been established throughout westernized civilization for over 2000 years that God is the Creator of the universe and everything in it, including civil government, hence where "rights come from".

On that note: Don't waste my time if you're going to pretend that you don't support the core tenet of libertarian ideology: "It's MY body and I can do with it as I please!"

 

Very few GOP candidates have been more unpopular with libertarians than Trump has been.

 

Since no one has stated how small l libertarian ideology differs from the preamble of the Libertarian Party, then they're one in the same. BTW, it's common when I discuss libertarianism that no one wants to be identified with it (it's such a filthy and disgusting ideology and movement, so I can't blame them), but anyone debating me on this topic is considered pro libertarian.

 

Look at the link that I posted regarding Donald Trump's long history of homosexuality. In it you'll find Trump attending homosexual so-called "marriages" and when asked about the Obergefell v Hodges SCOTUS ruling, President Donald Trump said that he was "fine" with the SCOTUS decision.

Ah yes, the ole "I'm personally against rape, murder and theft, but I just don't think there should be laws against them" con. Laws promote someone's worldview and legalizing/decriminalizing things such as homosexuality, abortion, pornography, prostitution and recreational drug use fit libertarians worldview to a "t".

Pimping for votes, who ever heard of such a thing?

Those were a couple of Donald Trump's campaign promises that got libertarians to drooling: Being tough on Muslim immigration and "America first" trade policies.

Libertarians for Trump - LewRockwell

BTW, you forgot to mention that you're NOT a libertarian!

 

Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul has gone from Trump critic to devout ally (courier-journal.com)