[ Attachment content not displayed ]
Will you also call for Imperato and Root to defend
their views on the war in Iraq. Last I heard Root was
still calling himself a Republican on a website.
-TJ
--- eric dupree <dupreeconsults@...> wrote:
Paul deserves an extreme examination because he's
going for the top
office.He must defend his views.From: Starchild
To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [lpsf-discuss] Re: Libertarians need to
be more politically
correct to succeed?
Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 17:26:07 -0700Brian,
I disagree. Republicans are by almost all accounts
even less PC than
Libertarians, and yet Republican Party candidates
are regularly
elected and their party firmly ensconced as half
of the
establishment. The reasons that the LP is not more
successful lie
elsewhere.
I'm not saying "shut the hell up, faggot." I think
you're entitled to
your views on Ron Paul, and I have a certain
amount of sympathy for
them myself. But I'm trying to look at the bigger
picture of moving
toward a free society, and not being a "single
issue voter."
I also think there is a bit of "heretic syndrome"
going on here [i.e.
no one is disliked more than the person who
differs enough from one's
ideas or program to be seen as no longer in the
fold (in this case,
not being in the LP), but still has enough in
common to not be seen
as playing on the opposing team]. There are
clearly lots of
politicians out there way more homophobic than Ron
Paul, but you seem
to be devoting most of your criticism to someone
who's less
homophobic and way more libertarian than most.
Love & Liberty,<<< starchild >>>A great deal of this discussion underscores why
Libertarian Party candidates, despite having the
right
stances on the issues, aren't making inroads
into the
general electorate.We've got white guys "explaining" why racist
rants
aren't racist, we have gay men "explaining" why
declaring a woman's uterus to be government
property
isn't so bad, we've got basically the diametric
opposite of every constituency we need to reach
out to
"explaining" why they're wrong and we're right.Until we learn to listen and build a broader
based
movement that solidly embraces our principles
(rather
than the phantoms of quick-n-easy victory),
we're
going to continue spinning our wheels.Ron Paul is no different. After his campaign
fails
and the GOP nomination goes to someone else,
there
will be no real momentum to grow the LP coming
from
many of its traditional supporters. Then they'll
wonder why we're marginalized -- yet again --
when the
reality is that we're fundamentally unwilling to
invest our energy in the hard work of growth. .
. and
are unwilling to consider that perhaps we
shouldn't be
"explaining" to people what the proper view is,
but
rather listening to them and helping them apply
libertarian principles to their own situations.I am frustrated with the Ron Paul thing
especially.If I boil the contents of much of the discussion
about
his gay rights record down to its core essence,
his
supporters are essentially saying "shut the hell
up,
faggot, you're screwing everything up."I know that women and racial minorities are
getting
the same message too. And that's not going to
"build
the party" in the slightest.Cheers,
Brian
--- bruce powell <brucemajorsdcre@...>
wrote:> If you abort one after 6 or 7 months, with
today's
> medical technology, you have to cut open its
skull
> and suck out its brains, else evicting the
> trespasser from the womb results in the birth
of a
> live preemie. Since that would mean the
formerly
> pregnant woman, and her sire, would have to
make a
> conscious decision to sign away parental
rights,
> liberals, feminists and some libertarians have
taken
> the position that society has the right to
dismember
> a fetus that would be viable if evicting from
the
> maternal womb, as opposed to the position that
a
> woman own's her body and has the right to
evict
> trespassers.
>
> "Abortion" is not a unitary or an unchanging
issue
> as technology changes.
>
> Try honesty.
>
>
> From: eric dupree <dupreeconsults@...>
> To: lpsf-discuss@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 6:32:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Re: [ca-liberty]
> Something for all the Ron Paul supporters to
read
>
> Should gov force or keep a person from a
person to
> get a medical procedure.
> We have no right to a women/person' s body.
> An unborn child has no rights in regards to
the
> women's body. The chicken before the egg. Life
> rights before proposed life.
> Parents have little or no right to their
child's
> pregnat body.
> I do hope for a day when more can be done to
save
> aborted fetuses.
>
>
> From: "Philip Berg"
> To: lpsf-discuss@ yahoogroups. com
> Subject: Re: [lpsf-discuss] Re: [ca-liberty]
> Something for all the Ron Paul supporters to
read
> Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 13:40:24 -0700
>
>
> Did you listen to his talk at Google and his
replys
> to very tough questions from Google's
progressive
> employees.?
>
> I do not think your characterizations are fair
but
> we agreee to disagree. The right to choose has
a
> legitimate counterpoint in the rights of the
child
> to be to life. At some point there is a
balance
> between the two. Some put it at conception,
some at
> the end of the first trimester, and some it
the
> moment of birth. Nearly all agree that once
born.
=== message truncated ===