Do You Guys Support This Libertarian-Leaning Agenda?

[WWFStern]

1. The government got out of the marriage business and instead issued only civil union licenses. As an element of that, such licenses would be granted to homosexual couples, polygamous groups, and incestuous couples, providing that they are all consenting adults.

2. The government got out of the censorship business, and revoked the FCC's unconstitutional power to declare certain things "indecent" or "obscene." Indeed, not even state/local governments should have such authority. The standards should be very simple: If a real crime of some sort is depicted on the videotape or in the magazine, one may prosecute the crime committed.

3. Free trade policy is fully embraced, and global free trade alliances are sought. Tariffs and protectionism should be considered "dirty words" and never viewed as a viable solution to any problem.

4. Military spending is drastically cut. The military should only be used for defense, and never for imperialistic purposes. With such a policy, the US would never have gotten involved in Vietnam, the Rwandan genocide, Kosovo, the current Iraq debacle, or the Mid-East peace process. Even genocides are not just cause for military interventionism.

5. Drastically cut back foreign aid, particularly military/political aid. Slowly begin to withdraw from, or play a lesser role in, organizations such as NATO and other permanent military alliances.

6. Remove religion from the public square. No more "Under God" and no more "In God We Trust." No more swearing on Bibles in the government and no more publicly posted Ten Commandments. Religion, much like pornography for example, must be isolated to the realm of the private.

7. End the War on Drugs. Period. Legalize all drugs for adult sale/use, including substances such as steroids and ephedra.

8. Formally recognize that personal medical decisions are PERSONAL medical decisions. The government has no right to interfere with such things as abortion or assisted suicide.

9. Outlaw capital punishment. Any government that has the power to kill its citizens is too powerful.

10. Cut back government spending on health coverage. The government footing one's health bills only gives the government more justification to interject itself into one's personal health choices. If one is responsible for one's own medical bills, one will have full freedom to make whatever healthy/unhealthy choices one wishes.

11. Since an educated populace is any country's greatest strength, renew federal efforts to make education more accessible, more affordable and of better quality. School vouchers will NEVER be a part of the solution; vouchers are part of the problem.

12. Reduce our use of coal and oil. Work toward creating better means of producing energy. Aim for a time when the US will have no use for oil whatsoever.

13. Crack down on illegal immigration. Deport illegals, irrespective of if they've been here for 2 days or 2 decades. Do not reward criminal behavior with amnesty or work-toward-legalization programs. Crack down on companies that hire illegals, and file lawsuits against such companies.

14. Secure the right of law-abiding gun owners to own firearms. Punish the crime: not ownership. While background checks are just common sense, making things illegal to all (criminals and non-criminals) is overly intrusive and unacceptable.

15. "Nanny laws" such as seatbelt laws and helmet laws are totally inappropriate with respect to adults. The government shall enact no law that is "for your own good" or "designed to protect you from yourself."

[Cocoa]

1. nope

[billbuckhead]

6. Libertarians are even worse than regular Republicans

Even hard core neocons, commies, lackluster middle of the roaders and the most laid back socialists actually hold the sky up every day. No libertarain system exists because it is unworkable. It's only promoted to make the "greed is good uber alles" meme look as a real alternative to real government.

[Comandante_Subzero]

10. Possible Futures

I'm not pro-lib, but the fact that a system doesn't exist is not proof that it's unworkable, only that it has not been put in place yet.

Some systems, like anarcho-syndicalism have had limited success but lacked (for one thing) the killing power of monopoly capital, so they did not become dominant.

[MisterLiberal]

59. Libertarians are dangerous

In the mid 90's after the Repukes took the House, they came up with the "Victimless Legislation Amendment" that basically would make their platform federal law!

The Repukes never even tried something that bad and they're only a step or two away from Repukes, so NO THANK YOU!

[Somawas]

2. Where did this come from?

I could support all but 3, 5, 9, 10 and 15 (to some extent). It appears to be libertarian leaning but not really libertarian. I think Libertarians are about 30% right. They believe in civil liberties broadly at the federal level, but are less comitted at the state/local levels.

To amplify that, just a little, I wouldn't mind at all seeing capital punishment banned, but the capital punishment proposition as stated is not one I would agree with. So I could agree with the result, but not the reasoning.

[msongs]

55. the original poster made it up from personal opinion n/t

[Mountainman]

3. Most of them I cauld not support.

I like removing religion from the public square and an end to the war on drugs. I don't like nanny laws either. I like reducing coal and oil usage and outlawing capital punishment.

The rest I cannot support.

[Fridays Child]

4. Yes, yes, no, yes, no, yes, yes, yes, yes, no, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.

[AJH032]

5. Libertarians and Liberals have a LOT in common

especially on issues of civil liberties, rights, and privacy. They differ on economic issues, and this tends to make many libertarians vote Republican. If we can emphasize the importance of the things we have in common, maybe we can sway some of them to vote Democrat.

[firefox]

7. It doesn't matter what you think

It is not like we get a straight up or down vote on issues. Even where a majority of Americans disagree with government actions it makes no difference. Medical marijuana is the perfect example where 4 in 5 have escaped government propaganda to see the other side.

I would prefer a government based on those positions over the fascist one we have now. So what, it doesn't make any difference what I or the majority think, as if the majority really do think on the general wrongnesses of government.

I certainly agree with ending the war on drugs that uses a philosophy that the criminal justice system can arrest their way to some kind of identifiable success.

[Is It Fascism Yet]

8. yes, yes, no, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, no, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes

yes except to 3 and 10. Is you crazy mon? Thanks.

[Arkana]

9. Um....

1. Yes, mostly, except for the incestuous part of it. I don't care where you're from, that's just sick.

2. Yes, with reservations...I don't think 10-year-olds should be watching the Playboy channel.

3. No. Not under any circumstances.

4. Yes. Without reservation.

5. No, never. How are we to maintain good relations with other countries? What if we needed help ourselves at one point?

6. Absolutely yes.

7. End the "War on Drugs" (that was a puppet created by Ronald Raygun), but only legalize marijuana. I think by legalizing it, less people will do it (as crazy as that sounds).

8. Hell yes.

9. See previous answer.

10. No, in fact, I would prefer universal health care.

11. Yes, absolutely.

12. See previous.

13. Nail companies like McDonald's, Wal-Mart, and other giants for doing this, but help the ones who have been here for years.

14. Yes, absolutely.

15. No. People in this country are dumb enough to need shit like that.

[Gronk Groks]

11. Much more interesting...

...is how far the Democrats have gone to embracing many Libertarian positions !!!

It use to be that the Republicans were considered closer to the Libertarian position than Democrats. The last five years of reThug Dictatorship have shown them far more dangerous to Libertarian ideals than Democrats ever thought of being.

Welcome to DU Mr Stern.:hi:

[Ian David]

12. Not to paint all libertarians with the same brush, but...

many libertarians I have spoken to have the following hang-ups:

1) The belief that smaller government is necessary and sufficient for greater freedom. De-regulate everything, and a Utopia will spontaneously emerge.

2) De-regulate everything and corporations will become environmentally friendly out of their own self-interest and sense of responsibility.

The libertarians I have spoken with seem less interested in personal liberty and more interested in corporate liberty.

Things like civil rights, government protection of women and gays and ethnic minorities are to be shoved aside in the interest of "smaller government" and "personal responsibility."

In other words, from what I have seen of libertarianism, it is (or has become) a thinly veiled disguise for corporate fascism.

I could be mistaken.

Maybe I have only been interacting with the lunatic fringe of the movement.

But the most telling clue is the nearly universal acceptance of the libertarian idea that corporate stewards will be environmentally responsible if the government stops regulating them.

And like one libertarian told me, "people should exercise the personal responsibility to drink bottled water."

[Somawas]

15. I don't think you're talking to the lunatic fringe-

that kind of corporate fascism seems to me to be common among the self-proifessed libertarians I've talked to. They seem to hold that its bad to let government fuck you over but its OK if a company does it because it's "private" and a choice of the "free market." some of those free market fantasies are pretty weird.

[Warren Stupidity]

13. massively inconsistent version of libertarianism

Capital is free to move across borders unhindered, but not people. Socialized universal education is recognized as a public good, but not socialized universal healthcare. Economic intervention on energy use, but 'Free trade policy is fully embraced'. Ooops, the poster forgot about environmental policy, workplace safety, and other social regulations of private enterprise that are probably a good idea.

[DanCa]

14. I can live with it ......

as long as they respect my right not to carry a weapon.

[wli]

16. point by point, here's my take

1. agree
2. agree
3. disagree
4. agree
5. agree on grounds different from those cited
6. agree
7. agree
8. agree
9. agree
10. disagree
11. agree with some differing rationales/intentions
12. agree
13. agree
14. agree
15. agree

So I only disagree with 2/15 points, both having to do with economic issues.

[dcfirefighter]

17. Meh.

Democratic Freedom Caucus
1. Yes, except for incest. I don't want to support the big-eared banjo playing children on the public dime. See #10.

2. Yes, as long as all 'FCC' broadcast licenses were auctioned periodically, such that 'We the people' get the full value of the license 'We the people' grant.

3. Yes, as long as we can collect externalities such a pollution charges from countries that pollute the air we breath and the oceans we share. I also would like source country labeling so consumers can choose not to buy from systems they don't like. We can easily outproduce slaves and children. IF i had to go with a 'protectionist' tarriff, i'd have it related to the GINI index, and nothing else. At least if everyone in some country is poor, then no one is taking advantage of anyone else.

4. Yes. Half your income tax goes to military spending.

5. Yes, BUT: we should compensate other countries for the damages we do to them, see #3 above. Eliminating our agricultural subsidies would do more for poor foreigners than our foreign aid ever has. From a 'Public Relations' standpoint we should retain at least disaster aid for the next 2 generations.

6. No. People should be free to profess their beliefs in the public square. I don't cringe at the mention of a non-specific 'God' by public officials, on currency, or in courtrooms.

7. Almost. Lets legalize cannabis (and industrial hemp) first. I think a line in the sand should be drawn btw. THC and more harmful drugs, because I don't want to pay for addicts when they hit bottom, nor do I want to pay more in security to keep them from stealing my stuff.

8. Yes, though no one should be forced to pay taxes that pay for other's abortions or assisted suicides.

9. I don't care, whichever's cheaper, life in prison, or the death penalty. I don't think the death penalty is a particularly effective deterrent.

10. I think this ignores a basic portion of human nature. When people need help, we give it. Hospitals can't and won't turn away emergency cases - and if you wait long enough it always becomes an emergency. Even without government funding, the costs would get passed on to other hospital users. I support market based universal healthcare, like Switzerland. Everybody must buy insurance. Every insurer must accept every applicant according to a rate schedule (by age, location, deductible, and benefits). Every insurer must pay whatever provider is chosen by the patient. If you can't afford insurance, the government will help you - but you still must shop around and pay a portion.

11. Interesting, all your other points are pretty straightforward Libertarian. I think vouchers have a place in retaining young couples who realize the hip city they moved to is no place to educate their children. I think public education has already segregated itself without vouchers. I prefer choice through charters, though. I don't mind public education as education as last resort. Quality education more than pays for itself, even in the short run, by increased property values in good school district. Tax them. Even property owners who don't have children benefit through increased net worth and resale value. Good schools don't raise the value of buildings, just land, so don't tax buildings. THis also makes education a LOCAL issue, so no wingnut can require everyone in the country to be taught some creation myth.

13. Absolutely.

14. Yes.

15. Yes.

[BlueIris]

18. I've read through the entire Libertarian party platform,

and would honestly rather vote Republican.

I don't have too much more I want to post about that, because despite disliking their ideas about how government should work, I really respect what the Libertarians did WRT election fraud last year. Thanks, guys!

Go read the platform at their website. It's...not something I can support. But perhaps all y'all with...differing views can get behind it.

[dajoki]

19. what true libertarians believe

here's a link to the liberterain agenda. i could never support it. the poorest of the poor will suffer worse than they are now. they want to eliminate social security, government healthcare(medicare&medicaid), foodstamps, welfare and every other social program you can think of. they feel by not taxing the rich and big corporations along with religious institutions, charity will be provided by them to those who need it. it can't work. deregulation will also cost jobs and reduce wages, not to mention what will happen to the environment. bad idea. http://www.lp.org/issues/issues.shtml

[ProudDad]

24. I gagged on their Crime and Punishment

section.

I suspect I'd barf out loud at most of the rest!

I'll pass for now...

[NaturalHigh]

32. What was so bad about it?

I didn't see anything I thought was particularly offensive.

[ProudDad]

34. This is what's so bad about it...

Step 1. Protect Victims' Rights

Protecting the rights and interests of victims should be the basis of our criminal justice system. Victims should have the right to be present, consulted and heard throughout the prosecution of their case.

In addition, Libertarians would do more than just punish criminals. We would also make them pay restitution to their victims for the damage they've caused, including property loss, medical costs, pain, and suffering. If you are the victim of a crime, the criminal should fully compensate you for your loss.



RESTITUTION IS ALREADY ON THE BOOKS IN MOST STATES...Few "criminals" can afford to pay it.



Step 2. End Prohibition

Drug prohibition does more to make Americans unsafe than any other factor. Just as alcohol prohibition gave us Al Capone and the mafia, drug prohibition has given us the Crips, the Bloods and drive-by shootings. Consider the historical evidence: America's murder rate rose nearly 70% during alcohol prohibition, but returned to its previous levels after prohibition ended. Now, since the War on Drugs began, America's murder rates have doubled. The cause/effect relationship is clear. Prohibition is putting innocent lives at risk.

What's more, drug prohibition also inflates the cost of drugs, leading users to steal to support their high priced habits. It is estimated that drug addicts commit 25% of all auto thefts, 40% of robberies and assaults, and 50% of burglaries and larcenies. Prohibition puts your property at risk. Finally, nearly one half of all police resources are devoted to stopping drug trafficking, instead of preventing violent crime. The bottom line? By ending drug prohibition Libertarians would double the resources available for crime prevention, and significantly reduce the number of violent criminals at work in your neighborhood.

THIS ONE'S FINE -- I AGREE...



Step 3. Get Tough on Real Crime

The Libertarian Party is the party of personal responsibility. We believe that anyone who harms another person should be held responsible for that action. By contrast, the Democrats and Republicans have created a system where criminals can get away with almost anything.

For instance: sentences seldom mean what they say. Fewer than one out of every four violent felons serves more than four years. Libertarians would dramatically reduce the number of these early releases by eliminating their root cause - prison over-crowding.

Since nearly six out of every ten federal prison inmates are there for non-violent drug-related offenses, it's clear that drug prohibition is the primary source of this over-crowding. It has been estimated that every drug offender imprisoned results in the release of one violent criminal, who then commits an average of 40 robberies, 7 assaults, 110 burglaries and 25 auto thefts. Early release of violent criminals puts you and your family at risk. It must stop.


NOTHING IN HERE ABOUT CORPORATE CRIME... They make the assumption that the major crime problem is street crime.



Step 4. Protect the Right to Self-Defense

We believe that the private ownership of firearms is part of the solution to America's crime epidemic, not part of the problem. Evidence: law-abiding citizens in Florida have been able to carry concealed weapons since 1987. During that time, the murder rate in Florida has declined 21% while the national murder rate has increased 12%.

In addition, evidence shows that self-defense with guns is the safest response to violent crime. It results in fewer injuries to the defender (17.4% injury rate) than any other response, including not resisting at all (24.7% injury rate). Libertarians would repeal waiting periods, concealed carry laws, and other restrictions that make it difficult for victims to defend themselves, and end the prosecution of individuals for exercising their rights of self-defense.


MORE GUN NUT NONSENSE. I wouldn't go within two blocks of a bar anywhere if this became the law of the land. Who needs all those damn guns anyway???



Step 5. Address the Root Causes of Crime

Any society that lets kids grow up dependent on government welfare, attending government schools that fail to teach, and entering an economy where government policy has crushed opportunity, will be a society that breeds criminals. No permanent solution to crime will be found until we address these root causes of crime.

The Libertarian Party would increase employment opportunities by slashing taxes and government red tape. We would also end the welfare system with its culture of dependence and hopelessness. Most important of all, we would promote low-cost private alternatives to the failed government school system.


HERE'S WHERE THE FAIRY DUST IS NEEDED TO MAKE SURE THOSE WONDERFUL WINNERS in the economic race help the 80% less fortunate... Private school for all?

for any hard of hearing Libertarians out there: POVERTY IS THE NUMBER ONE CAUSE OF CRIME.. Got that... (Next to the drug war) POVERTY IS THE NUMBER ONE CAUSE OF CRIME. How do you propose enabling the haves with no responsibility to the rest of society cure poverty...

[dajoki]

37. don't get injured...

or sick or ever run into a problem where you will need help. oh, and don't get old either.

[Tigress DEM]

36. Yeah that 5% they spend on welfare would really go far.

Health Care AND Social Security.....

[niallmac]

20. If you disagree with 10, think again about #15

I am for universal health care end of subject. A child with Leukemia did not make a life style decision to have that disease. What a crock for government to allow its citizens to drift into
poverty because of an act of Gawd.
Seat belt laws. I don't care if an adult rides beltless but I have a problem with the kids who have no say being put at unnecessary risk.
Helmet laws. If a motorcycle rider say, can choose to not wear a helmet fine. He/she DOES NOT have the right to soak the public treasury for thousands of dollars of health care for his quadraplegia, brain damage etc as a direct result of this 'born to be free' decision not to wear a brain bucket. Not wearing a helmet should require a mandatory signature on a donor card. We need those kidneys folks! Really!

[dcfirefighter]

22. Helmet laws

People who wreck on motorcycles without a helmet don't cost that much to treat. A trip to the hospital, and a body bag.

People who wreck on motorcycles with a helmet tend to cost more, because they are more likely to live.

It should be a choice, but your insurer should be able to deny your claim if you don't have a helmet on.

[niallmac]

28. Actually, I hadn't thought about that.

Sounds pretty logical. Are those DOT stats?
I am still trying to find a way to get more people to sign donor cards. Tons of folks out there who wouldn't hesitate to do so but are never approached. Need a national promo for a few months.

[jmowreader]

52. Torque injuries kill lots of helmeted motorcyclists

When you wear a motorcycle helmet, you're sticking a large, moderately heavy piece of plastic on your head. If you get into a wreck, that hunk of plastic is going to transfer the energy in it to your neck--one of the more fragile parts of your body.

A torque injury killed Dale Earnhardt.

I used to ride, and if I took it up again I'd get a Hutchens Device. This is a system of straps that connects your helmet to your body; in a wreck it allows the energy in the helmet to transfer to your torso, which is more robust than your neck is.

[ProudDad]

21. Not really...

I find a great deal of resonance with Libertarian positions on Privacy (which the far-right "conservatives" would say is a fiction since it "isn't in the Constitution").

Other than that, I'm afraid we part company. I CAN agree to disagree and work with the "L"'s on the phony drug war, sexual freedom, cutting the military budget and separation of church and state.

------------------------------------

1. The government got out of the marriage business and instead issued only civil union licenses. As an element of that, such licenses would be granted to homosexual couples, polygamous groups, and incestuous couples, providing that they are all consenting adults.

THIS ONE'S VERY GOOD...I'd edit it to be: "such licenses would be granted to homosexual couples, polygamous groups, heterosexual couples and incestuous couples, providing that they are all consenting adults."


2. The government got out of the censorship business, and revoked the FCC's unconstitutional power to declare certain things "indecent" or "obscene." Indeed, not even state/local governments should have such authority. The standards should be very simple: If a real crime of some sort is depicted on the videotape or in the magazine, one may prosecute the crime committed.

THIS ONE'S VERY GOOD...


3. Free trade policy is fully embraced, and global free trade alliances are sought. Tariffs and protectionism should be considered "dirty words" and never viewed as a viable solution to any problem.

NOPE!!!!

WHEN THE DECK'S AS STACKED AS THE "WESTERN" CORPORATIONS HAVE IT STACKED, THERE WILL NEVER BE SUCH A THING AS "FREE TRADE"...not between nations and not even within industries. This dog don't hunt. Corporations should lose "personhood", be chartered for a short time only and should be heavily regulated.


4. Military spending is drastically cut. The military should only be used for defense, and never for imperialistic purposes. With such a policy, the US would never have gotten involved in Vietnam, the Rwandan genocide, Kosovo, the current Iraq debacle, or the Mid-East peace process. Even genocides are not just cause for military interventionism.

(Edited) QAULIFIED YES.

THE U.S. DIDN'T GET INVOLVED IN RWANDA until it was too late. Since the fact is that the west (primarily the U.S.) is ripping off the world for resources and labor to feed it's hungry consumerist society, they FUCKING owe something back!

The U.S. Military is TOO DAMN BIG. It's too tempting for fascist idiots like the present bunch to use for their nefarious purposes.

Keeping some kind of peace (preferably with an International Force) should be the way the international community should police itself.


5. Drastically cut back foreign aid, particularly military/political aid. Slowly begin to withdraw from, or play a lesser role in, organizations such as NATO and other permanent military alliances.

YES on Military aid. NOPE on Humanitarian aid!!!

SEE MY ABOVE RESPONSE. The industrial west is ripping it off from the have-not nations, they owe something back.


6. Remove religion from the public square. No more "Under God" and no more "In God We Trust." No more swearing on Bibles in the government and no more publicly posted Ten Commandments. Religion, much like pornography for example, must be isolated to the realm of the private.

THIS ONE'S GOOD...ACTUALLY it's imperative for there to ever be a Democracy in the U.S.


7. End the War on Drugs. Period. Legalize all drugs for adult sale/use, including substances such as steroids and ephedra.

THIS ONE'S VERY GOOD...THIS ONE WOULD ALSO NEARLY ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR every yahoo in town to think they need to own a gun...

HOWEVER, this would increase the need for a strong, well funded public health system to take care of the addicts who will no longer be wherehoused in the prisons and jails...



8. Formally recognize that personal medical decisions are PERSONAL medical decisions. The government has no right to interfere with such things as abortion or assisted suicide.

THIS ONE'S VERY GOOD...


9. Outlaw capital punishment. Any government that has the power to kill its citizens is too powerful.

THIS ONE'S GOOD (for a different reason, capital punishment is immoral and counter-productive).


10. Cut back government spending on health coverage. The government footing one's health bills only gives the government more justification to interject itself into one's personal health choices. If one is responsible for one's own medical bills, one will have full freedom to make whatever healthy/unhealthy choices one wishes.

SINGLE PAYER, SINGLE PAYER, SINGLE PAYER. The BEST BEST BEST health care system at the least costs in the WHOLE DAMN WORLD is in Cuba. That's the one we should emulate!!!! (Check out the article in the latest issue of the Ecologist).


11. Since an educated populace is any country's greatest strength, renew federal efforts to make education more accessible, more affordable and of better quality. School vouchers will NEVER be a part of the solution; vouchers are part of the problem.

THIS ONE'S GOOD...IN FACT, AS IN CUBA, ALL EDUCATION FROM ELEMENTARY SCHOOL THROUGH GRADUATE SCHOOL should be at NO cost to the student or her/his family.


12. Reduce our use of coal and oil. Work toward creating better means of producing energy. Aim for a time when the US will have no use for oil whatsoever.

THIS ONE'S GOOD...although how do the Libertarians propose to make this happen when the whole damn economy is built on a sea of oil and those with the power want to keep it that way?



13. Crack down on illegal immigration. Deport illegals, irrespective of if they've been here for 2 days or 2 decades. Do not reward criminal behavior with amnesty or work-toward-legalization programs. Crack down on companies that hire illegals, and file lawsuits against such companies.

AND WHO'S GOING TO DO THE DIRTY WORK?

SERIOUSLY, check above. WE RUINED THEIR ECONOMIES TO FEED OURS. How do you propose ameliorating that damage?

ALSO, IF YOU'RE REALLY SERIOUS ABOUT THIS, the next step is that all "illegals" should leave which would leave only the native Americans left. WE ARE (nearly) ALL IMMIGRANTS!!!! The Libertarians (and other xenophobes) just want to pull up the ladder after they've climbed up to the top floor.



14. Secure the right of law-abiding gun owners to own firearms. Punish the crime: not ownership. While background checks are just common sense, making things illegal to all (criminals and non-criminals) is overly intrusive and unacceptable.

WHY DO YOU NEED GUNS??? WHAT IS THIS OBSESSION WITH FUCKIN' GUNS??? Most people don't ever, won't ever need them and couldn't successfully wield them if they did especially if there are fewer guns around (see drug "war").

This gun thing is some kind of deviant, proto-sexual hangup with certain people (mainly) in the U.S. of A. "Weird preversion" as Col. Bat Guano would have said....



15. "Nanny laws" such as seatbelt laws and helmet laws are totally inappropriate with respect to adults. The government shall enact no law that is "for your own good" or "designed to protect you from yourself."

IF WE HAD THE SINGLE PAYER HEALTH CARE SYSTEM, this would be do-able. As it is, the health care costs of those who get really fucked up by driving/riding without seatbelt/helmet or child seat is a rather large cost that justifies some regulation.

And I'm a motorcycle rider who hates helmet laws but recognize that the public Health Care costs under the current HORRIBLY expensive system are a valid argument for them.

---------------------------------------------

To me, the whole problem with the Libertarian economic positions is that they are way too utopian. Somehow they seem to depend on the fairy of equality to sprinkle dust on those with a huge excess of power and control over the economy and environment so that they will feel compelled (somehow?) to share with the less fortunate and preserve the environment for future generations.

That dog ain't gonna hunt either... :crazy:

[NaturalHigh]

33. Re: WHY DO YOU NEED GUNS???

I keep two guns in my house for self-defense. I never carry them outside my house, and my kids can't get to them. Whatever hangup some people might have about guns, it is my right to defend myself in my own home.

[johnaries]

42. I own a shotgun because I live in the woods.

Last year, I had to kill a rattlesnake and a copperhead that had taken up residence in my front yard. If they're just passing through, I let them go their merry way, but when they decide to live where they pose a threat to me or my dog, I have to shoot them.

So I agree with you. Some of us really do NEED guns!

[ProudDad]

44. If you live in the woods

you may need a shotgun. I have no problem with that.

If you live in town, you sure as shit don't need a bunch of handguns, unless you're damn good and ready to kill someone...

I live in a city, we don't need ANY F*CKIN' more guns here!!!

[johnaries]

51. I can appreciate that, but where do we draw the line?

Do we allow only people to own guns that show "need"? How are those needs defined?

Even if guns are outlawed, criminals will still be able to find them and get them.

Instead of gun control, we should concentrate on gun SAFETY! At one time, the NRA was actually a SAFETY organization. We should get them involved and encourage them to go back to doing the job they used to do.

You have to go through driver training and testing in order to drive a car, why shouldn't you have to go through a gun safety course and pass a test before you can purchase a gun? And many of our current laws on purchasing a gun are not being properly enforced. It is too easy to get a gun, especially for criminals.

As far as assault weapons are concerned, I think they should be banned. No one needs an AK47 to kill a snake or hunt deer.

[ProudDad]

53. For me the brightest line is handguns

They are designed for target shooting and killing human beings at close range.

I've used them for target shooting...it was kind of fun at the time but not a good reason for me to own one now. I've pulled one on other people and I've had one pulled on me -- neither were pleasant experiences nor was the gun necessary. I eventually came to my senses and got rid of all the guns I owned.

I feel safer in my urban jungle NOT having a handgun than I would having one.

Can anyone give me any good reasons for handguns?


(And please don't give me the canard about "self-defense since the criminals will always be able to get them." They are able to get them easily now because they are lying around in closets and bedside tables in people's homes -- easy to steal; but mainly because the gun sales laws are so porous that anyone can get a gun through one of the unregulated gun dealers that you can find under any rock you care to turn over.

If there were fewer handguns made (like just enough for law enforcement under HEAVY, HEAVY regulation, which wouldn't be that many -- European street law enforcement don't need them) and the rest melted down, where are these "criminals" going to get theirs?

[Gyre]

65. Gun lobby is big business in Washington.

#1 reason handguns, nor any other firearm are going to get banned anytime soon. Got nothing to do with public safety, and everything to do with the WH paying off political donors.

Gyre

[johnaries]

66. Yes, I agree that handguns are a different issue

and should be "handled" differently (sorry about that!). I'm still not sure a complete ban is the best answer since, as I said, criminals will always find a way to get them. But I wouldn't oppose a ban on handguns.

[NaturalHigh]

61. I live in an small city of about 12,000.

I own a shotgun and a small handgun, strictly to defend my home if necessary. Don't get me wrong, I would hate to ever have to use them. If necessary to defend my family, though, I would without hesitation. That is my right.

I'm for sensible gun laws. There is no reason for anyone to be sporting around a .50 caliber or a machine gun, but I can't go along with people who are in favor of banning all guns.

[bonzotex]

23. No No to all of it...

The Democratic Party is a big tent. We are certainly more interested in personal civil liberties than the Repugs. We can also incorporate many of the basic concepts listed in some of these proposals Libertarianism, however, is not the answer.

Libertarians love throwing out ideas to "get the government off our backs" but rarely think through to what the Libertarian utopia would really look and feel like at ground level. Lets go to "Libertarica" for a little bit.

The sink-or-swim social Darwinism inherent in Libertarian thought ignores the reality that there is not a level playing field for all citizens. It would not get any more level in "Libertarica". Rich people would get richer and exploit the poor and disenfranchised. Forget about anyone with a handicap or sudden unexpected medical problems. Libertarians say, their families, churches and friends will step up to the plate! Think of all the reasons that doesn't work now, then tell me why it would magically work in Libertarica?

Libertarians love the individual but hate the community. We are stronger as a community than as a group of rugged individuals. To function as a community, whether Town, County, State or Nation you need some structure to govern and distribute and yes, redistribute resources for the common good.

In "Libertarica" no big public works would be accomplished, no national road, rail, or air infrastructure, no sweeping social reforms, no National environmental protections. You wouldn't have national standards of anything, weights, measures, electrical current, industrial safety standards? pish-posh! You think these things are common sense? Easy to agree on? Wrong. You would mainly just have small self-interested groups bickering over local resources.
You would have powerful elites hoarding and selling resources and services like feudal Lords.

Libertarica would not have any realistic defense capability as a Nation. They would not fund a real military for defense or otherwise. You may think the prospect of America being invaded is ridiculously remote, but think ahead 100 years as resources become more scarce. Think back 200 years about all the countries that never thought they'd be invaded.

The anti-Globalist rhetoric is just willful blindness. Like it or not we live in an interconnected World now. Pollution from China rains on California. Uranium mined in African can ride a train to Pakistan. Starving people in the Caribbean and Central America have legs and boats. Viruses can ride in people's noses from anywhere in the world and land in the US in a few hours.
We can't withdraw and mind our own bid'ness. We can watch all our manufacturing and creative jobs go elsewhere. It's happening now and would be worse in Libertarica. Foreign aid, even sometime military intervention overseas, can be in our best long-term interests. That cost money and wouldn't happen in Libertarica.

Freedom to abuse your body with drugs of choice while riding helmet less on motorcycles shooting guns? Sounds fun to me, but when people start getting killed, the survivors will find ways to ban those activities they find most obnoxious and dangerous, even in Libertarica. Do you want different laws in 10,000 small communities or broader general laws that everyone can at least know if not entirely agree with?

Libertarians anti-death penalty? The first time some meth junkie kills a little girl in your "township" just watch how fast the death penalty comes back in vogue.

Public Education as we know it, both good and bad wouldn't exist in Libertarica. It's too expensive and requires too much collective effort and income redistribution. Libertarica would start out dumb and get dumber and dumber.

The anti-immigrant rhetoric is plain old racism. And who is going to police the borders in Libertarica anyway? Rednecks with pickups, guns and cases of beer in back tend to go home after the weekend is over. (I drive trucks, own guns and have a redneck over my blue-collar BTW) Going to have a better immigration system to let the right people in?...Keep the "bad" people out. That costs money bubba, lots of it.

The gun rhetoric is just fucking stupid. Law abiding citizens already have very secure rights to own all sorts of extreme firearms. If anybody is going to take away your guns, they will have Republican Elephants on their shoulder flashes.

Energy independence will be a huge collective effort by government, industry and the citizens working together. I could happen, but not in Libertarica.

I could go on and on. Yes I'm being sarcastic and using extreme examples, but I've never met a Libertarian that could really defend his view against any serious application of reality. These are fun ideas to kick around the campfire but generally not worthy of serious consideration.

[ProudDad]

26. Good stuff!

I love that "Libertaria"!!!

I sure as HELL wouldn't want to live there.

Of course, I wouldn't have to live there long as the average life expectancy for anyone but the few rich and powerful would be pretty damn low...

[bonzotex]

30. Thanks, but it's not hard to find problems with Libertarian ideas.

In a way, I really wish some of the Libertarian ideas were practical.

The thing I find most hilarious is you have these far left Libertarians imagining some gentle, communal, intellectual and artistic utopia and Far right libertarians imagining sturdy Christian homesteads and townships..standing tall with the help of God, Guns, Family and Freedom. You have casual Libertarians who just don't like Taxes and being hassled by the cops for doing something they personally think should be legal. All these groups mouth the same talking points, but have bizarrely opposed concepts of how it would work out. None of them realize how badly the majority of people would get fucked over under Libertarian "government"

People are mainly just scared, looking for someone to blame, and disgusted with status quo political parties. In that atmosphere, lots of wacky ideas can make sense. Fighting for positive change within the existing system is a lot harder than just making shit up that you think would be better.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

38. Libertaria actually exists--it's called

The Third World. No taxes to speak of, no regulations on business, no environmental laws, all health care and education private, no welfare except private charities, no foreign wars, the government might actually help you market your drugs, guns all over the place. Should be heaven, right?

[Mairead]

62. Nice one, Lydia!

Warren Buffet made much the same point when he noted that a large part of the reason he's so wealthy is that he lives here and not in, e.g., Rwanda.

I've several times suggested to cap-libs that there are any number of places in the world where there's little government and everyone is fairly much on their own, but it always turns out that they want all the benefits of first-world life, just not the burdens. A very adolescent attitude, imo.

[iwantmycountryback]

25. Not a chance

Agree with some things, find others totally reprehensible.

[WildEyedLiberal]

27. HELL NO

Free trade is responsible for more suffering around the world than war. Third world nations get poorer and deeper in debt as they are exploited ruthlessly by predatory multinational corporations and industrialized countries. These countries are held in debt slavery to the industrialized world, and free trade ensures that this cycle of exploitation and corporate profit at the expense of humanity continues. If that weren't bad enough, free trade harms American workers and the poor and middle class, because its much cheaper for corporations to send their factories to developing nations with no labor or wage standards where they can exploit their workers for a greater profit than they can in America.

[mrdmk]

29. Interesting post, where did you get these 15 topics?

Schools yes, Military needs to be cut back yes. All of the others are either a more or less no.

[Viking12]

31. #12 definitely requires anti-Libertarian approaches

12. Reduce our use of coal and oil. Work toward creating better means of producing energy. Aim for a time when the US will have no use for oil whatsoever.

There's no way this will happen w/o heavy government intervention into the market. Given the past govt intervention in creating the dependence on oil and coal, it will take govt intervention to severe that dependence.

[Tigress DEM]

35. No. It's not as much the ideas... some have merit, it's the extremity..

of their agenda. Black/White. No gray. When it involves letting big business make stupid decisions based on greed that can kill people, regulation is sensible and this agenda doesn't have a common sense feel to it. It's more like some other rigid guidelines that should bring peace and prosperity "if only the world would edmbrace it" - sigh.

[Adelante]

39. No right here, for one

4. Military spending is drastically cut. The military should only be used for defense, and never for imperialistic purposes. With such a policy, the US would never have gotten involved in Vietnam, the Rwandan genocide, Kosovo, the current Iraq debacle, or the Mid-East peace process. Even genocides are not just cause for military interventionism.

I only wish our military had been sent, along with forces from all of the world, to stop the genocide in Rwanda. I wish the same for Darfur.

I agree our military should be used for defense and not imperialism, but I will never take human rights off the table. It's what we should be using our military for, whenever possible, saving lives.

[durutti]

40. My Take

1: Not sure about polygamous couples. The setup tends to be patriarchal.

2: Disagree. Commercial speech shouldn't be protected, in my opinion.

3: I oppose tariffs in this country, but they're beneficial to developing countries.

4: I would go further: the military should be abolished. It should be replaced with a federation of citizens' militias.

5: I would like to see more foreign aid, but to different countries. I would like to see a withdrawal from current military alliances immediately.

6: Agree.

7: I would legalize marijuana and maybe some other drugs. Others I would just decriminalize.

8: Agree on abortion. Not sure about assisted suicide. It's a slippery slope from there to the culling of the weak and the poor; and besides, if we don't let people sell themselves into slavery, then how can we let them kill themselves? I think it should be thoroughly regulated and restricted, though perhaps not prohibited outright.

9: Agree.

10: I would nationalize the healthcare system.

11: Agree.

12: Agree.

13: Disagree. Immigrants don't hurt anyone. Open borders.

14: I think gun control is pretty much a non-issue.

15: Pretty much agree. But there are lots important things to be concerned about, I think.

[Zhade]

41. Completely? No.

#3 is right out. No fucking way will I support "free" trade policies like NAFTA/CAFTA that encourage outsourcing, the destruction of America's manufacturing base, and the exploitation of slave and near-slave labor in other countries.

I repeat: FUCK THAT.

Some of the others needs significant tweaks, some are good as written.

[election_2004]

43. About the marriage / civil union debate

While I personally would have no problem with everyone being on an equal footing through civil unions (leaving marriage to religious institutions)...

Do you HONESTLY believe that conservative heterosexuals are going to allow politicians to take away their privilege of receiving a government-recognized, government-issued *marriage*?

The word "marriage" is just too important to too many straight people, and I can't see anyone persuading them to get the government out of the marriage-defining business.

[ProudDad]

45. The word marriage should be completely

REMOVED from all government activities along with the word "god" and all other religious fluff and flummery.

Everyone who commits to a binding relationship to another human being should be eligible for a civil union -- entitled to all of the thousands of tax breaks and perks that that union confers now.

[Vektor]

46. I agree with 6 & 8 the most, 11&12 ( a lot) and to a good degree, 14.

The others I range from, having some reservation about, to outright disagreement with. I do agree with some Libertarian principles.

[rman]

47. Missing: global labor- and wage standards

If "traders" are allowed to create global alliances, then so should workers. Corporations view the labor market as being global, right? Well then.


Nanny laws:
would regulation of gun ownership be considered a "nanny-law"?
is regulation of car ownership considered a "nanny-law"?

Health coverage:
One's health is not exclusively dependant on personal decisions - it's not that hard to be run over by a car, or to have some chronic hereditary disease, without being responsible for it.
I'd say that all those things of common interest (which would include public health) should be under control of the government and should be collectively financed.

Any problem with the government is not so much a problem with government per se, but a problem with lack of transparency and oversight of the government.


these are just a few comments of the top of my head

[Andromeda]

48. Nada, nein, niet, zilch...

Try creating your own Libertarian Underground website.

[mvd]

49. My opinion

1) I used to believe in this completely. It's still ok, but I kind of doubt that the word "marriage license" will be allowed to be dropped. So give marriage licenses to all consenting couples.

2) If this means no warning labels or ratings of any sort, I disagree. It can be a helpful tool for parents.

3) I believe there should be limits to outsourcing, and that some major players (countries) would take advantage of this policy.

4) We need less war and more humanitarian efforts IMO

5) Don't cut back aid to 3rd world countries. And Bush has isolated us enough..

6) This one is fine with me

7) Harder drugs (heroin, cocaine, etc.) should not be legalized IMO.

8) I agree with this

9) This is a good idea

10) Completely disagree - I'm for national health care

11) Can't argue with this one!

12) I'd like to see it happen

13) This is too harsh and could endanger lives

14) Well, I'm not for making firearms illegal - though I wouldn't make securing the right one of my biggest efforts

15) Depends on the law for me

[baldguy]

50. Yes. Yes. No. Yes. No. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. No. Yes. Yes. No. Yes*. No.

1 Marriage – Generally agree. Marriage is a religious agreement between individuals, government should have nothing to say about it. However, when children are involved government has an interest in protecting them and insuring that those adults responsible for them actually carry out those responsibilities.

2. Censorship – Again, generally agree. But it should be recognized that mere speech is not always harmless. Inciting violence, intolerance or hatred should be banned. Also there should be requirements for businesses to tell the truth. And the news media has a special responsibility to inform the public.

3. American trade policies should be crafted to promote American businesses. Trade barriers should be lowered and eliminated only to the extent that a foreign country meets or exceeds our own labor, safety & environmental regulations. American corporations which have factories in foreign countries should be required to meet American labor, safety & environmental regulations.

4. Agree that military spending needs to be cut. Our security should rely on alliances & international agreements with the idea that peace is in our national interest. The only justification for military intervention would be a humanitarian crisis – like Rwanda or Kosovo.

5. Disagree. The US pays almost nothing in foreign aid. And it shouldn't be based on our own narrow parochial political process, but on actual need: if some congressman from East Slimewater Texas gets a bug up his ass when he finds out the bribes his pet corporation paid out in a foreign country didn't work, he shouldn't be able to retaliate by cutting the aid to that country.

6. Agree: Congress shall make no law with respect to the establishment of religion.

7. Agree: End the War on Drugs.

8. Agree: Personal medical decisions are PERSONAL medical decisions.

9. Agree: Outlaw capital punishment.

10. Disagree: Government's primary function is to do things which individuals are unable to do for themselves. Health care falls under this definition. The US is the only country on the planet which doesn't do this.

11. Agree: Education should be free. Period.

12. Agree: The fewer resources we spend on energy consumption, the more we can re-direct toward other goals.

13. If a person will risk everything – his life, his family, his freedom – for a chance at a better life for himself and his family, and work himself to death in order to get it, that's the kind of person America needs. Artificial and arbitrary limits on immigration are exactly that: artificial and arbitrary.

14. Generally agree, with a proviso: All guns should be registered, and all guns owners should be licensed. A gun owners rights are secure as long as he secures his gun. He would be responsible if his gun is used in a crime as an accessory to that crime.

15. Disagree: As long as your behavior effects me, then the government has a responsibility to regulate that behavior.

And one more:

16.The idea of “corporate person-hood” should be eliminated. While individual behavior should be mostly unregulated, the behavior of corporations and other collective entities must be regulated.

The problem I have with libertarians is that they are incessant whiners. They want all of the privileges of democracy without any of the responsibilities. The old, old idea that no man is an island is basically true. They whine endlessly about taxes, but taxes are not the greatest evil in the world by far. NOT EVEN IN THE TOP 1000! Taxes in America are almost nothing compared to every other industrialized country in the world. They whine endlessly about their guns, but guns are tools which almost nobody has a real need for in an environment made mostly safe by the elimination of dangerous animals by development and the suppression of crime by law enforcement.

[ProudDad]

54. And there's another reason

"They whine endlessly about their guns, but guns are tools which almost nobody has a real need for in an environment made mostly safe by the elimination of dangerous animals by development and the suppression of crime by law enforcement."

They also are not needed since most people have internalized the concept that they don't have the right or the need to just assault or shoot another person. Most people find the use of deadly force in everyday life stupid, counter-productive and abhorrent.

That's what keeps us safe from one another.

The silly idea of everyone armed with a concealed weapon couldn't EVER do any better than the collective conscience of the populace. Even in the war zone I live in, the "criminals" don't go around shooting innocents.

[salin]

56. WWFStern - where'd ya go?

Looking for a discussion - or ... ???

[bvar22]

57. Some are appealing

#3 is an ABSOLUTE NO!!!!

However, you pose an interesting Idea, especially in Personal Freedoms. There is enough here for the Democratic Party to actively campaign FOR the LIBERTARIAN votes, especially with The Republican Patriot Act, the Failed Republican Iraq War, the Failed War on Drugs, and the Republican examples of interfering with Private Personal decisions. The Democratic Party should spend some money to target a campaign toward the Libertarians highlighting the OBVIOUS Anti-Libertarian values of the Republican Party.

[sendero]

58. You carefully leave out..

... the fact that the libs' belief in minimal regulation over business include belief in minimal oversight also.

Instead of an Enron or Worldcomm every few years, we'd be having them every few weeks.

Libertarianism is a utopian system of government just like communism. Communists expected citizens to do what is right for the country, it didn't work because people operate in their own self interest first.

Libertarians are just like communists in that they believe that businesses, if left alone, will do the right thing. Nothing could be further from the truth but try talking to a libertarian. They are among the most delusional people on the face of the earth IMHO.

[Mairead]

60. Partly.

I'm a libertarian, but not the right-wing kind. So I'd be implacably opposed to all the bits that assume that society-as-jungle is a good idea. I prefer society-as-family.

I do note, tho, that none of the cap-lib proposals I've ever seen really want society-as-jungle, they want society-as-jungle-with-(them)-as-apex-predator. Whence all the emphasis on contracts.

Cap-libbism is a very Masters-Of-The-Universe sort of thing, very adolescent: unlimited power and nookie for the favored few, with no worries about having to pay one's dues or having some big sod with a club come along and spoil all the fun.

[Pystoff]

63. Parts of this are total garbage and NOT Libertarian at all

13 is bullshit infact the LP wants totally open borders this is a non-corporate Pug stance here.

12 is a GP stance the LP doesn't have a stance on energy anything like this.

11 isn't a LP stance they only want the death of the dept. of education and let the public finance their own education making haves and have nots as far as knowledge.

10 is not LP stance either they don't want cuts they want the issue cut totally.

14. The Lp doesn't want background checks on firearms they don't like the governemnt knowing anything personal at all.

1.yes except polygamous and incestuious situations.
2.yes
3.no
4.yes
5.yes except NATO
6.yes
7.yes on mariujana no on the rest.
8.yes
9.no
10.no and keep the government out of personal decisions anyways.
11.yes
12.yes
13.yes
14.yes
15.yes

[mvd]

67. Anti-death penalty is also not a Libertarian value

At least it's not a value related to the Libertarian Party. My opposition to the death penalty is something not really connected to Party. It's a personal belief. More Democrats happen to have my belief.

[Pystoff]

68. Not me

I don't mind the death penalty...I just want the correct person when it is applied.

[mvd]

69. I'm opposed in all cases

I'm opposed to the State having the power to kill, and the system will never be perfect enough for me.

[Pystoff]

70. Welp I'm not

I'm opposed to paying to keep some mass murderer or child molester alive for the rest of his life with my tax dollar.

Makes it different when you have to pay for his upkeep if you ask me.

[mvd]

71. Again, we disagree

If you want talk expenses, you could talk appeals, which are needed of course.

I can't be swayed here. The death penalty goes against my moral beliefs.

[Pystoff]

72. Yup we do

Sure murderers that can never assimilate back into society get 3 appeals.

I can't be swayed here either. My morals are just fine they keep me from killing ppl as well and then living the rest of my life at your expense.

[mvd]

73. Most of DU agrees with me

As I said, there are high expenses the other way. I believe that we need a thorough appeals process.

Have a nice day - we can't agree on this one I guess. I don't believe the death penalty solves anything. :hi:

[Pystoff]

74. Maybe

But there are alot more than you'd think agree with my point of view here as well.

[mvd]

75. Well..

There's a healthy majority here that is anti-death penalty - probably about 70-30. I'm glad of that. I will say that when there's only life with parole and the death penalty offered, it almost gets me to re-think in some cases.

We are both on the same side in which is most important - defeating Bush and the neo-cons. Welcome to DU. :hi:

[Pystoff]

81. Hi to you too

And yes we are on the same side.

Not on this issue and maybe some others but in general yes we are definately.

[Trajan]

64. Of COURSE many here would agree with some ...

and disagree with others ....

I mean: what do you expect the answers will be ? ... identical ? .. COMPLETELY approving ? ... COMPLETELY disapproving ? ...

I am a LIBERAL who agrees with SOME of your points, but I disagree on others ....

Imagine that ..........

[mmonk]

76. No

I believe society has a collective responsibility to provide for the general welfare of it's citizens. I do agree with some of their points, however.

[Carolab]

77. Except for 3, 10, part of 13 and 14, pretty much...

13.Deport illegals, irrespective of if they've been here for 2 days or 2 decades.

Don't agree that if people have been here two decades they should leave. I have a friend who was here that long and just became a citizen.

I think that people who have been here that long and are productive members should be allowed to gain legal citizenship.

[lojasmo]

78. 3 and 10 need some work.

3 I would modify to say that free trade is good when the country being traded with has at least the same worker protections as the USA.

10 I think is a bad Idea. I firmly support universal single payer health care solutions.

[LWolf]

79. Let's see:

1. Yes
2. No
3. Never
4. Yes
5. Maybe
6. Yes
7. Yes, as long as any marketing/advertising is illegal with stiff penalties.
8. Yes
9. Yes
10. No
11. Maybe, depending on the specifics.
12. Yes
13. Maybe, if legal immigration is made more accessible.
14. Maybe
15. No, in moderation.

[Darranar]

80. Some yes, some no...

1. I agree with that. Marriage is between citizens, the government should step out.

2. I agree with this as well. People are capable of not watching what they don't want to watch.

3. I'm totally opposed to this. Such an arrangement would devastate workers across the globe, and developed countries would rig the game, cheating the developing world and letting their rich elite make huge profits.

4. I support drastically cutting military spending, and I'm opposed to imperialist wars. Intervention in the case of genocide is justified, however, if all other means are exhausted; watching as people are slaughtered is simply not a morally acceptable course of action.

5. Military aid should be cut. Humanitarian aid should be greatly stepped up, with increased working with NGOs rather than governments.

6. Agree with all of this. With a large number of wholly secular people in our society, it is immoral to shove religion in people's faces like that.

7. The "war on drugs" amounts to a war on the poor and minorities, and I'm totally opposed to it. I support legalizing marijuana, at least; less certain about the rest.

8. I agree with this one too. People have the right to make their own choices concerning their own bodies.

9. Enthusiastic agreement with this one. Capital punishment is barbaric.

10. This is a very misleading and utterly false statement, basically an excuse for saying, "let those who can't afford health care die."

11. I agree with this. Education should be a higher funding priority than it is.

12. I agree with this one as well. Wasting our natural resources the way we do is a recipe for disaster, and the ecological damage is catastrophic as well.

13. I am totally opposed to this one for humanitarian reasons. If we want to stop illegal immigration we should stop destroying the economies of the countries they come from. (For what it's worth, statement 13 in the original post is hardly a libertarian position.)

14. I am opposed to a ban on firearms, so I suppose I agree with this one.

15. Not sure about this one.

[Moderator]

82. Locking

seems the original poster declines to comment on your remarks.