Shooters Forum banner
1 - 5 of 5 Posts

· Banned
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
Chief,

Unless you are in favor of narcotic legalization, child pornography, and fewer criminals behind bars you are not a Libretarian. Don't be fooled by their generally pro-gun stance, they are not what they appear to be. More anarchist than anything.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
Brian,

I would certainly agree that pornography of any kind is repulsive. The only reason I mentioned child pornography is because of the Libretarian Party's support for the North American Man-Boy Love Association. I won't disgust our board members here with details on that organization, but I think you can get a solid idea of what they're about just from the name.

Yes I have heard all the arguments about freedom to choose for oneself and that drugs only hurt those who use them. Patently, provably false in the most obvious way. My neighborhood was once a fine community where anyone could be happy to raise a family in as much safety as society can provide. For a number of reasons I won't get into here, that is no longer the case. But the underlying thread is rampant narcotics use. Crack cocaine, heroin, etc. Now how can legalizing these same drugs make them any less dangerous to the users and my family? The addicts will become even more addicted because the price will go down and likely their drugs will be paid for by tax dollars. The young who may sit on the fence will now see that it's okay to use narcotics. Heck, the government says so! So now you have more addicts than before. Addicts who will steal from you, rob you at gunpoint, go berserk in a drug-induced fit, etc. I have seen it all. I have had threats made against me by such individuals. Even beyond criminal misuse, what happens when crack pipes become as common as cigarettes? Will "Libretarians" say
when the surgeon slips, or the school bus driver crashes, or whoever screws up under the influence of a now legal substance that their drug use harms no one but themselves?  

This is not a question of God's law. It is a question of common sense. God given common sense. Remember
Romans 7:17...

I know nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good but I cannot carry it out.

To make narcotics legal, acceptable, cheaper, and available is to make a chaotic nation even more so.


(Edited by Bill Lester at 7<!--emo&:0--><img src="http://beartoothbullets.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':0'><!--endemo-->9 am on Sep. 4, 2001)
 

· Banned
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
Brian,

At no point did I inply you believe that widespread narcotics use is acceptable. What I did illustrate is what will happen if they are legalized, as the Libretarian Party supports. Among a righteous people the law of God is all we would need. However I believe we would both agree we are not a righteous nation. Much like new gun laws, new drug laws are not needed. Existing ones are fully sufficient if properly and equitably enforced. But that is another, lengthy issue entirely.

(Edited by Bill Lester at 7<!--emo&:0--><img src="http://beartoothbullets.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif" border="0" valign="absmiddle" alt=':0'><!--endemo-->5 am on Sep. 4, 2001)
 

· Banned
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
ID,

You are so right about the validity of so much on the 'net. A good example is a modernized version of the Ant and Grasshopper parable. You may have seen it yourself, where the industrious ant's warm shelter, stored food, etc. are taken away when the shiftless grasshopper sues in Federal court. Anyhow, the originator is a disc jockey-turned-conservative radio show host here in Pittsburgh by the name of Jim Quinn. He has proof of it, when he first aired it years ago. But now you can find it many places on the 'net without due credit or under someone else's name.

Marshall,

I'm glad you reconsidered locking this topic. I think that in light of incredibly close elections like we had last November the truth must be told about the Libretarian Party. While we gun owners pat ourselves on the back for putting W in the White House, that isn't the case. The numbers clearly show it was the Ralph Nader vote that put him there. If his Third Party effort hadn't existed, Al Gore would be President. Scary ain't it?

That's why I take great pains to show my conservative, Christian, freedom-loving friends like those who have posted to this thread that the Libretarians are not all they appear. That in many ways their platform does not jibe with our own beliefs. And that to vote Libretarian is to throw-away a vote for the wrong party that cannot be elected. Call it political evangelism if you will.

There is no malice in my heart to anyone whether we agree in this discussion or not, nor should it be inferred.
 

· Banned
Joined
·
1,116 Posts
Brian,

Your words are quite true. I consider Liberty to be the overriding reason for our nation's founding and our Constitution. It is something worth fighting and dying for if necessary. The so-called "Libretarian Party" has capitalized, pun intended, on the word hoping potential supporters won't examine their positions under a microscope.  Unfortunatly many don't and that was my desire, to illuminate on the Libretarian Party's positions
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top