Conservatives Against Liberty

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Does not the teachings of God go directly against these things? How can you love God with all of your heart, mind and soul and then love your neighbor as yourself if you don't rebuke people from engaging in immoral behaviors by showing them that God has a better way or use His institution of civil government to punish those that commit crimes against nature and thus in the long run help them?

Continuing to CONFLATE a POLITICAL party with the idea that people should be free to make their own choices.

Take it up with this guy:

So gee whiz... the Libertarian Party agrees with basic libertarian philosophy.... who woulda thunk?

You seem angry and when Libertarians get angry, what do they do? They use the force of government that they claim that they hate.

So before you hit the "ban him!" button and the government of TOL bans me for being disruptive, I'll bid you adieu.

 

[drbrumley]

So your idea of "public safety" means that the government should run every aspect of our lives?


A nice smoke screen to guard your idea that the government should run every aspect of our lives.

My good friend here ACW supports legislation against victimless crimes only as long as it stops short of his particular vice.

 

[drbrumley]

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Does not the teachings of God go directly against these things? How can you love God with all of your heart, mind and soul and then love your neighbor as yourself if you don't rebuke people from engaging in immoral behaviors by showing them that God has a better way or use His institution of civil government to punish those that commit crimes against nature and thus in the long run help them?




Take it up with this guy:




You seem angry and when Libertarians get angry, what do they do? They use the force of government that they claim that they hate.

So before you hit the "ban him!" button and the government of TOL bans me for being disruptive, I'll bid you adieu.

Such the drama queen.

 

[drbrumley]

Isn't it considered anarchy if laws aren't passed that prohibit and hence punish certain immoral behaviors?

What kind of immoral behaviors?

Look at the destruction recreational drug use has done to the US, could you imagine how bad it would be if it were legal?

Hmmmmm, and there have been laws on the books for decades to combat that, and all we have to show for it is billions of dollars down the toilet, people who really are not criminals thrown in jail, confiscated property etc etc etc.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Isn't it considered anarchy if laws aren't passed that prohibit and hence punish certain immoral behaviors?

What kind of immoral behaviors?

Homosexuality is a good example. Look at the chaos the Libertarian/LGBT movement has brought to society since it was legalized. Droves of homosexuals dead from AIDS, many who engage in that infamous crime against nature don't even know that they're infected with it. Drag Queen Story Hour, where children are indoctrinated to the ways of sexual perversion. Etc. etc. etc.


Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Look at the destruction recreational drug use has done to the US, could you imagine how bad it would be if it were legal?

Hmmmmm, and there have been laws on the books for decades to combat that, and all we have to show for it is billions of dollars down the toilet, people who really are not criminals thrown in jail, confiscated property etc etc etc.

Obviously you're not familiar with the drug culture that you defend or you're just living in a world of denial. There's a pandemic running throughout out nation, and it's not because recreational drugs are illegal, it's because of your Libertarian ideology that says that people can do with their bodies as they please, in this case ruin their lives, their family's lives and their communities with recreational drug use.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

My good friend here ACW supports legislation against victimless crimes only as long as it stops short of his particular vice.

Show me a crime that isn't victimless.

 

[drbrumley]

Show me a crime that isn't victimless.

I can't. All crimes need to have a victim...not a supposed victim, a potential victim, but an actual victim...

Can you name a victim in regards to someone not wearing a motorcycle helmet?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Show me a crime that isn't victimless.

I can't. All crimes need to have a victim...not a supposed victim, a potential victim, but an actual victim...

Can you name a victim in regards to someone not wearing a motorcycle helmet?

For those States that have motorcycle helmet laws and enforce them, it's not a crime if you don't wear one, it's a violation. There's a huge difference.

But let's not talk about things like helmet laws, let's talk about real "victimless crimes" like recreational drug use, prostitution, pornography, homosexuality and suicide, you know, those things that people are supposedly justified in doing as long as they've given their "consent".

 

[drbrumley]

For those States that have motorcycle helmet laws and enforce them, it's not a crime if you don't wear one, it's a violation. There's a huge difference.

What? You have to pay a fine....your breaking a state LAW!!!!! Do you even listen to yourself?

But let's not talk about things like helmet laws, let's talk about real "victimless crimes" like recreational drug use, prostitution, pornography, homosexuality and suicide, you know, those things that people are supposedly justified in doing as long as they've given their "consent".

Go ahead, name the victims of these crimes..

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

For those States that have motorcycle helmet laws and enforce them, it's not a crime if you don't wear one, it's a violation. There's a huge difference.

What? You have to pay a fine....your breaking a state LAW!!!!! Do you even listen to yourself?

For those who don't understand the difference between crimes and violations:

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclop...meanors-infractions-classification-33814.html

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
But let's not talk about things like helmet laws, let's talk about real "victimless crimes" like recreational drug use, prostitution, pornography, homosexuality and suicide, you know, those things that people are supposedly justified in doing as long as they've given their "consent".

Go ahead, name the victims of these crimes..

I understand that you Libertarians don't believe that a person can be a victim of their own actions, but that's why righteous laws are made: to protect people from themselves as well as protecting others from their thoughtless actions (it's that "love your neighbor as you'd love yourself" thing).

Families: Families are destroyed by your "victimless crimes". Recreational drug use, alcoholism, pornography, prostitution; not so "victimless" if you ask the loved ones.

Communities and a nation as a whole:

Ever wonder why there's a security camera on every street corner and dozens inside buildings? I'll give you a hint, it's not to watch people carrying Bibles.

 

[drbrumley]

Where did the Apostle Paul ever express support for any type of state action against vices, immorality, or sin?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Now that drbrumley understands that victimless crimes aren't so victimless, he asks

Where did the Apostle Paul ever express support for any type of state action against vices, immorality, or sin?

Obviously you haven't been following your own thread, as Romans 13: 1-7 has been discussed in the majority of the posts. While you're at it, read what the Apostle Paul says about love in Romans 13: 10 which explains why there is no such thing as a Libertarian Christian.

 

[The Barbarian]

What kind of immoral behaviors?

Hmmmmm, and there have been laws on the books for decades to combat that, and all we have to show for it is billions of dollars down the toilet, people who really are not criminals thrown in jail, confiscated property etc etc etc.

The war on drugs, if it had worked, might have had some justification. But it didn't work. It's not working. Hence, even many on the right are now willing to accept marijuana being legal. For the simple reason that use of the drug is less damaging (although it certainly does do damage) than the huge expense and damage done by prohibition.

Alcohol does far more damage, and you know how that war worked out for us.

 

[The Barbarian]

Obviously you haven't been following your own thread, as Romans 13: 1-7 has been discussed in the majority of the posts.

It's clear that ineffective and unwanted laws provoke resistance. Therefore, by your admission, they cause sin. I thought you were advocating government action to stop sin? The argument that ending prohibition would make us awash in alcoholics turned out to be false. So far, legalization of marijuana use in various places has not lead to a plague of potheads.

It's not the function of government to make us good, and attempts to make it do so, generally backfire.

 

[Gary K]

Well then I guess that me and Ralph will have to disagree then, won't we?


I happen to disagree with some libertarians that feel that way. But I still believe that the basic principles are fully compatible with God and the Bible.

Do unto others... etc. etc. etc.

It is more than "some" libertarians that think that way. If you didn't notice the the name of the site it is libertarianism.org. That means it's the predominant view of libertarian thought and philosophy. I also saw nothing disputing those ideas there. And, on the same site there is praise for postmodernism, which is skepticism. That is a direct descendant of the rationalism that came out of the French revolution which was anti-God.

I'm interested in why you think a philosophy which supports ideas the Bible completely condemns can fully compatible with the Bible. I do not see the "do unto others" as being applicable here. Here's why. If I was on a path leading to my sure destruction, whether I realized it or not, I would want someone to tell me that I was and why I was. I don't see how accepting behaviors that God has condemned as treating others the way I want to be treated. Would you want to be left to your own devices if you were on a path to destruction? Toleration/acceptance of sin is not compatible with scripture.

 

[Right Divider]

It is more than "some" libertarians that think that way. If you didn't notice the the name of the site it is libertarianism.org. That means it's the predominant view of libertarian thought and philosophy. I also saw nothing disputing those ideas there. And, on the same site there is praise for postmodernism, which is skepticism. That is a direct descendant of the rationalism that came out of the French revolution which was anti-God.

OK, fine... I disagree with most of those libertarians. But my point still stands that the basis of liberty stands.

I'm interested in why you think a philosophy which supports ideas the Bible completely condemns can fully compatible with the Bible. I do not see the "do unto others" as being applicable here. Here's why. If I was on a path leading to my sure destruction, whether I realized it or not, I would want someone to tell me that I was and why I was. I don't see how accepting behaviors that God has condemned as treating others the way I want to be treated. Would you want to be left to your own devices if you were on a path to destruction? Toleration/acceptance of sin is not compatible with scripture.

I don't condone sin in any way. But I do advocate liberty and free exchange of goods and services without coercion or force.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

Obviously you haven't been following your own thread, as Romans 13: 1-7 has been discussed in the majority of the posts.

It's clear that ineffective and unwanted laws provoke resistance.

Without a doubt laws are useless unless the society has cultural mores' that embraces those laws. That's why God created 3 institutions for the governance of man, the family and the Church being the other two, where all 3 work together so that the nation will do good in His eyes, not bad.

 

[The Barbarian]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

Without a doubt laws are useless unless the society has cultural mores' that embraces those laws. That's why God created 3 institutions for the governance of man, the family and the Church being the other two, where all 3 work together so that the nation will do good in His eyes, not bad.

Our government forbids the establishment of religion. And so laws against "being bad" are not legal unless they involve one doing harm to another. That being so, one is in rebellion against those set above us, if one doesn't accept this.

Looks like a catch-22 for a state worshiper.

 

[drbrumley]

Now that drbrumley understands that victimless crimes aren't so victimless, he asks



Obviously you haven't been following your own thread, as Romans 13: 1-7 has been discussed in the majority of the posts. While you're at it, read what the Apostle Paul says about love in Romans 13: 10 which explains why there is no such thing as a Libertarian Christian.

“Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life? If then you have judgments concerning things pertaining to this life, do you appoint those who are least esteemed by the church to judge? I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you, not even one, who will be able to judge between his brethren? But brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers! Now therefore, it is already an utter failure for you that you go to law against one another. Why do you not rather accept wrong? Why do you not rather [let yourselves] be cheated?”

Next.....

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

Without a doubt laws are useless unless the society has cultural mores' that embraces those laws. That's why God created 3 institutions for the governance of man, the family and the Church being the other two, where all 3 work together so that the nation will do good in His eyes, not bad.

Our government forbids the establishment of religion.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the moral foundation criminal laws are based upon.

And so laws against "being bad" are not legal unless they involve one doing harm to another.

Spoken like a Libertarian. I'd say that unless harm is done to someone or something (the moral fiber of a nation) it wouldn't be a criminal act, but been there, done that in an earlier post.

That being so, one is in rebellion against those set above us, if one doesn't accept this.

Looks like a catch-22 for a state worshiper.

Yes, rebellion against righteous laws and a civil government that uses God's Word when it comes to legislating those laws is definitely a rebellion against God.

Thanks for acknowledging that.