libertarian president in 2016 / parade, etc.

Marcy,

Don't be silly. No one is suggesting that Mr. Newman should have to
perform gay sex (and you know it). No doubt, if he had a better handle
on his imagination, his bowels might suffer a bit less.

I thought it was pretty obvious that I was taking exception to sentiments
like this:

"homosexuality is a depraved and perverted lifestyle."

The same drumbeat is repeated in a multitude of rhythms throughout
his essay. At one point, he even goes so far as to brand those who
support gay-rights and/or don't believe in his god as un-american.

This kind of rhetoric stems from his own personal bigotries and
superstitions. It has never been part of the libertarian message
and should not be promoted as such.

It's also clear that his "case for opposing a constitutional amendment
prohibiting same sex marriage" is nothing of the kind. He agrees 100%
with the principle behind it, he only disagrees with it as an effective
strategy, i.e. his essay is simpIy a call for homophobes to exercise
more competence and skill when planning attacks against gays.

It is the prevalence of Mr. Newman's type of obnoxious, anti-gay
hysteria-mongering that creates the societal conditions that spawn
these amendments to begin with, i.e. his rant is part of the problem,
not part of the solution.

Mr. Newman seems to be a libertarian in the Ann Coulter mold, i.e.
an abrasive disaffected conservative trying to promote his own
agenda on the Libertarian Party dime.

---Travis

Rant away, Travis! As a Libertarian, I am especially in favor of the
Firs Amendment, for Mr. Newman and for you!

Regards,

Marcy

--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, "Travis Ebert"
<Travis_Ebert@p...> wrote:

Marcy,

Don't be silly. No one is suggesting that Mr. Newman should have to
perform gay sex (and you know it). No doubt, if he had a better

handle

on his imagination, his bowels might suffer a bit less.

I thought it was pretty obvious that I was taking exception to

sentiments

like this:

"homosexuality is a depraved and perverted lifestyle."

The same drumbeat is repeated in a multitude of rhythms throughout
his essay. At one point, he even goes so far as to brand those who
support gay-rights and/or don't believe in his god as un-american.

This kind of rhetoric stems from his own personal bigotries and
superstitions. It has never been part of the libertarian message
and should not be promoted as such.

It's also clear that his "case for opposing a constitutional

amendment

prohibiting same sex marriage" is nothing of the kind. He agrees

100%

with the principle behind it, he only disagrees with it as an

effective

strategy, i.e. his essay is simpIy a call for homophobes to exercise
more competence and skill when planning attacks against gays.

It is the prevalence of Mr. Newman's type of obnoxious, anti-gay
hysteria-mongering that creates the societal conditions that spawn
these amendments to begin with, i.e. his rant is part of the

problem,

not part of the solution.

Mr. Newman seems to be a libertarian in the Ann Coulter mold, i.e.
an abrasive disaffected conservative trying to promote his own
agenda on the Libertarian Party dime.

---Travis

From: Amarcy D. Berry
To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2005 9:07 AM
Subject: [lpsf-discuss] Re: libertarian president in 2016 / parade,

etc.

Travis,

Since the rest of Mr. Newman's article from which you quote makes a
case for opposing a constitutional amendment prohibiting same sex
marrieage, I have no problem with his stomach doing 360's. I am
assuming that the Libertarian principle of using our own bodies as

we

see fit also applies to Mr. Newman. I do have a problem, however,
when personal beliefs regarding any subject (homosexuality,

abortion,

prostitution, gods in public spaces, etc. etc.) translate into

action

at the ballot box which results in limiting my Constitutional
rights. Perhaps Libertarians need to focus on such actions?

Marcy

--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, "Travis Ebert"
<Travis_Ebert@p...> wrote:
> From: defliberty@a...
> To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 3:38 AM
> Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Re: libertarian president in 2016 /
parade, etc.
>
> >Doug Newman describes himself as Christian and libertarian. Maybe
his
> website and articles
> >could be helpful when dealing with the religious right.
>
> Or maybe not.
>
> --Travis
>
> Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos
>
> "Let me be blunt: homosexuality is a depraved and perverted
> lifestyle. The thought of going at it with one of my own

positively

I think you're both right. This fellow sounds like a despicable human
being, and would make a lousy poster-child for the LP. Let's hope he
is never promoted by the membership at large.

On the other hand, I think it's important to remember that the both
the Libertarian party and the philosophy are open to people of
traditional belief systems, even the "religious right", so long as
they differ from their traditional group in the use of violence or
coercion. It would not be inconsistent for a libertarian to speak out
against or even stage a protest outside of a gay function.

I would never try to deny anyone their right to have negative feelings
about me or people like me, nor would I try to stop them from speaking
about it. Someone who stated that they don't like Jews, would still
be welcome to sit across from me at LP meetings, although I probably
wouldn't be inclined to be very social with that person. It's only
when they directly advocate violence or coercion that they become
decidedly un-libertarian.

-Morey

Morey,

What you state was the point I was trying to make (obviously not very
successfuly!).

Marcy

--- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, Morey Straus <morey.straus@g...>
wrote:

I think you're both right. This fellow sounds like a despicable

human

being, and would make a lousy poster-child for the LP. Let's hope

he

is never promoted by the membership at large.

On the other hand, I think it's important to remember that the both
the Libertarian party and the philosophy are open to people of
traditional belief systems, even the "religious right", so long as
they differ from their traditional group in the use of violence or
coercion. It would not be inconsistent for a libertarian to speak

out

against or even stage a protest outside of a gay function.

I would never try to deny anyone their right to have negative

feelings

about me or people like me, nor would I try to stop them from

speaking

about it. Someone who stated that they don't like Jews, would still
be welcome to sit across from me at LP meetings, although I probably
wouldn't be inclined to be very social with that person. It's only
when they directly advocate violence or coercion that they become
decidedly un-libertarian.

-Morey

> Marcy,
>
> Don't be silly. No one is suggesting that Mr. Newman should have

to

> perform gay sex (and you know it). No doubt, if he had a better

handle

> on his imagination, his bowels might suffer a bit less.
>
> I thought it was pretty obvious that I was taking exception to

sentiments

> like this:
>
> "homosexuality is a depraved and perverted lifestyle."
>
> The same drumbeat is repeated in a multitude of rhythms throughout
> his essay. At one point, he even goes so far as to brand those who
> support gay-rights and/or don't believe in his god as un-american.
>
> This kind of rhetoric stems from his own personal bigotries and
> superstitions. It has never been part of the libertarian message
> and should not be promoted as such.
>
> It's also clear that his "case for opposing a constitutional

amendment

> prohibiting same sex marriage" is nothing of the kind. He agrees

100%

> with the principle behind it, he only disagrees with it as an

effective

> strategy, i.e. his essay is simpIy a call for homophobes to

exercise

> more competence and skill when planning attacks against gays.
>
> It is the prevalence of Mr. Newman's type of obnoxious, anti-gay
> hysteria-mongering that creates the societal conditions that spawn
> these amendments to begin with, i.e. his rant is part of the

problem,

> not part of the solution.
>
> Mr. Newman seems to be a libertarian in the Ann Coulter mold, i.e.
> an abrasive disaffected conservative trying to promote his own
> agenda on the Libertarian Party dime.
>
> ---Travis
>
> From: Amarcy D. Berry
> To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2005 9:07 AM
> Subject: [lpsf-discuss] Re: libertarian president in 2016 /

parade, etc.

>
> Travis,
>
> Since the rest of Mr. Newman's article from which you quote makes

a

> case for opposing a constitutional amendment prohibiting same sex
> marrieage, I have no problem with his stomach doing 360's. I am
> assuming that the Libertarian principle of using our own bodies

as we

> see fit also applies to Mr. Newman. I do have a problem, however,
> when personal beliefs regarding any subject (homosexuality,

abortion,

> prostitution, gods in public spaces, etc. etc.) translate into

action

> at the ballot box which results in limiting my Constitutional
> rights. Perhaps Libertarians need to focus on such actions?
>
> Marcy
>
>
> --- In lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com, "Travis Ebert"
> <Travis_Ebert@p...> wrote:
> > From: defliberty@a...
> > To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 3:38 AM
> > Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Re: libertarian president in 2016 /
> parade, etc.
> >
> > >Doug Newman describes himself as Christian and libertarian.

Maybe

> his
> > website and articles
> > >could be helpful when dealing with the religious right.
> >
> > Or maybe not.
> >
> > --Travis
> >
> > Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos
> >
> > "Let me be blunt: homosexuality is a depraved and perverted
> > lifestyle. The thought of going at it with one of my own

positively

> > makes my stomach do 360s. Christianity and numerous other
> > faiths condemn it. It is a lifestyle fraught with peril. God

made