Why I can’t be a Libertarian.
No drug laws.
Who’s going to scrape up the overdoses or we just going to let the corpses rot on the sidewalk?
A Libertarian is just a Democrat that thinks he won’t have to open his wallet.
A Libertarian would plunge us into darkness faster.
Categories: Uncategorized
No, a libertarian is polar opposite to a liberal. Liberals (also known as Democrats, progressives, socialists–and many other names I best not post) believe the government should take care of its citizens cradel to grave, share the wealth, resources, etc. equally –exccept for the exceptional elites who make the decisions for everyone else). Libertarians believe in the freedoms every indiviual is endowed with from birth that the constitution is SUPPOSED to protect. The constitution says we are supposed to be secure in our persons. (Secure is the word for privacy–the word privacy in our Founders Day was a reference to the privy (bathroom).
Do you really believe the streets would be littered with drug addicts if drugs were legal? Pshaw!! Schools, employers, etc. could still make their own rules about drug use and most folks wouldn’t risk their future to get high. Those that would are doing it anyway. But the bottom line is: Who is the government to tell anyone what they can and cannot do with their own body? You own your body.
If the war on drugs was stopped tomorrow and instead, drugs were made legal, here’s what would happen:
Job creation
A new tax base from legalized drugs AND the release of prisoners who are in jail for nothing but drugs
Our neighbors to the South could perhpas live to see another day without the drug cartels.
Our law enforcement could concentrate more important things–or better yet, we could get rid of scores of law enforcement at local, state and federal levels and save money.
But the most important thing is people could be free in their own bodies, not just to smoke pot or do heroin, but to get the medicines they need (this goes way beyond recreational drugs–the government regulates everything including experimental cancer treatments)
I don’t do drugs because I care about my body and my family. NOT because it’s illegal.
I’m a big girl. I don’t need the government making those decisions for me.
Sorry for the long comment, rjp.
Job creation – What about the unemployed drug dealers? They are not skilled. Most can probably not read a newspaper want ad. They are criminals. No rock to sling, then house must be robbed.
Tax base – More taxation.
Release of prisoners – Very few are quiet people that deal a lttle weed or some coke end up in prison, at least here in Chicago, most are hardcore criminals who would eventually be in prison for something else.
Law enforcement – Nothing but a paramilitary force anymore. They are never going away.
Legal drugs – Means available on nearly every corner. How many youths you think do not try harder drugs just just because they would have to go into gang infested slums to procure? Legal eveywhere and available everywhere means a lot more experimenters and a lot more people finding out they have the addiction gene – just traded the need for prison beds to the need for rehabilitatoin beds.
Like I said, I think Libritarians are just Liberals in Thought who think they won’t have to open their purse, I don’t think they are cradle-to-gravers, just “let everybody do what they want to do and it will all turn out fine” people. No, it won’t. We have no social cohesion in this country, no value system anymore. In the time I have been alive, we have gone from a great country, me at age 7 in 1976 thinking the Bicentennial was the greatest celebration ever, in every town in this country, to a society that looks down on European heritage and everything associated with it, and holds the outsider up in glory – outsiders who don’t care to abide by any values we hold.
A Libritarian country in my opinion would be a Utopia gone amok, with chaos everywhere. If you have a chance, watch The Running Man (1987). That is what I think the future holds for us without a return to some Christian Conservative society.
I was beginning to think I had silenced you with my wisdom when a response was not forthcoming (HA!) We agree that our country needs to return to conservative Christian values. Obviously, we do not agree on what a libertarian is or on the level of personal freedom we are really endowed with. I’m o.k. with those diferences of opinion. (Just as an aside, you do know Ron Paul is a libertarian–would you call him a liberal?) With regards to drugs, I would still rather see money invested in education and rehabilitation than incarceration. And I still do not think its the government’s business if I want to take drugs, have 10 children or jump off a bridge. But I do think its o.k. to agree to disagree.
Happy Thanksgiving!
Silenced me? You posed some questions I wanted you to know I answered them because it had been a few days and I surely didn’t want to hijack your thread. I don’t think Ron Paul is a liberal, but he is also much much older than most libertarians. But I must say that at first he was against gay marriage. Now? And I could add that a conservative Christian libertarian would hold very different vales than a Hollywood libertarian, which I feel is the brand of libertarian-ism being pushed by many. — I didn’t renew Reason magazine this year.
Secretly I believe we should have many more freedoms than we do, however I realize that at this point it is not possible. And if a society can not self regulate it’s members through a system of values and a moral code, there are not many other alternatives that a legal system and if it fails us, as it currently is in my opinion, vigilante justice may have to take it’s place — especially with the increased push for Section 8 housing and the violence that is following it into once safe neighborhoods. Enough on this topic for now.
Happy Thanksgiving to you too.