any Libertarians here?

[TheBaroness]

Not necesssarily party faithful but people who believe in the principles of small government and personal freedom. Show yourselves

[and we whisper]

:-|

:wave:

I sort of agree with lunchforthesky but I still believe in the principles of small government and personal freedom.

[Nevuk]

I'm libertarian with a little l. Its the closest label that fits me. I would probably be classified as an anarchist, more precisely. I do realize anarchism does not work, but that does not prevent my idealogy from being it. Essentially, I am a selfish ass, and believe that that specific government would suit my beliefs best. Does that mean it would work? No. Which is why I'm not out trying to support it, libertarianism is my compromise so I don't have to live in the woods eating rats.

[Brianfarg]

I lean that way, but not completely. I'd really like to see Ron Paul be president.

[The Revisionist]

Hello!

I think I lean a little more toward "apathetic" than I do completely embracing libertarianism, but less government, the better. A pure and untainted libertarian community would be amazing I believe, but I tragically realize that will never happen in my lifetime. :(

[justanotherface]

I dunno but I agree with most of the Libertarian ideas.
Not sure though

[cantnokdahustle]

I think Libertarianism is a very utopian philosophy that sounds great in principle but seems in practice to lead to massive social inequality and economic oligarchies. Often to the extent to which people are not free in the slightest to achieve all they can achieve.


Truth.

[hockeycoshow]

I believe in the ideals of libertarianism. But i will NOT join the party until they start following their own ideals.

[Iamhome]

My mom is a retired librarian.

[Yes. And?]

didn't barry goldwater oppose the civil rights act of 1964 on libertarian principles?

[Justin_stacy]

didn't barry goldwater oppose the civil rights act of 1964 on libertarian principles?

he called it legislating morality, and unconstitutional.

[Yes. And?]

he called it legislating morality, and unconstitutional.
not an excuse, in my book.

[Justin_stacy]

not an excuse, in my book.

i guess i don't get what you mean?

[Yes. And?]

i guess i don't get what you mean?
that's not a good reason for opposing that bill.

there was no good reason for opposing it.

[Justin_stacy]

that's not a good reason for opposing that bill.

there was no good reason for opposing it.

Being unconstitutional isn't a good enough? Why even have the document?

[Yes. And?]

because it was the 60s and things would have never come this far without it?

[Justin_stacy]

So congress should be able to pass any act regardless of whether its constitutional or not? What happens when they try to inact something you don't agree with?

[Yes. And?]

they've been trying with that marriage amendment.

[8:17am]

I think Libertarianism is a very utopian philosophy that sounds great in principle but seems in practice to lead to massive social inequality and economic oligarchies. Often to the extent to which people are not free in the slightest to achieve all they can achieve.

As far as i'm concerned Libertarianism belongs in in 18th Century.

Well put. I'm a liberal Democrat, and certainly believe in personal freedom, but I also believe that government can be an instrument for positive reinforcement. I think it's important that we have a government with a vested interest in improving the quality of American lives, and that that's what their primary function should be. If having a big, complex government means there will be more equality, both economically and socially, and that assistance is provided to those who need it, I'm in favor of it. While I like the idea of reducing bureaucracy, and making it easier for people to get what they need, it's just not practical. We are a bureaucratic government, our bureaucracies are what help us provide safety and assistance to our citizens, and the smaller the government, the less safety and assistance can be insured.

My answers get a little wordy, sorry.

[watchmyheadspin]

My mom is a retired librarian.

hahahaha

[Justin_stacy]

i personally think a written constitution is a bad idea as society moves too fast and changes too rapidly for it to work. It just seems to lead an unprogressive element like the NRA and does little protect the people from someone with bad intentions, i.e Geroge W Bush.

If it works to stifle unnecassary "progress" then that shouldn't be viewed in a negative light. Society tends to move to fast with little thought of the overall out come of its actions and if a written document can work to limit that while still allowing for change when actually needed, i see only positive from that.

People need protection from their government, we also need our rights set in stone so that they can not be taken away from an over acting government...ie the right ot bear arms.

[trindaddy]

not too libertarian here. seems a little archaic to me. many who claim to be libertarian dont vote libertarian, and often dont even hold the values that they claim to believe in.

[Justin_stacy]

without getting into a debate over the issues mentioned, i think that proves the document is imperfect. But the truth is i'd rather have it and what protections it gives me against government, then not have it all.

[x togepi x]

Yeah but the thing is, that it doesn't work. Habeus Corpus, Patriot Act etc..


but that's the people's fault. if people don't check their governments back, they'll do whatever they want, constitution or not. I wouldn't say this proves the constitution "doesn't work", i'd say it shows how lame american citizens are, who care more about paris hilton's jail sentence than domestic spying bills.

[x togepi x]

it sets out basic principles that can act as guidelines for behavior.