How many Libertarians here are Pro-Life, and Anti-Gay Rights?

Question

I am a Libertarian and am a strong supporter of Gay Rights and Women's right's to choose. I am strong supporter of small government, low taxes and civil liberties and indivual freedom for everybody which is a very typical Libertrarian perspective.

Ron Paul is Pro-Life and against Gay Rights. After reading his record he sounds more Republican.

Are there Libertarians out there who even though understand people's enaliable right's still vote against people's right's?

It would be interesting to hear a perspective from a Lib. who votes to ban individual rights. I have never met, or have heard of this happening before.

LOL! Gay Right's is Gay Marrige/Civil Unions - equality in a homophobic society. You knew exactly what I meant. LOL! Voting to take away a tax paying citizens right's based off religious idealogy that does not pertain to everybody is wrong. regarldess of how you feel on the subject.

Gay's deserve rights too. Period.

And as far as the "fetus" arguement, again it's all based off "when does life begin?" This again, is based entirely off of eliminating a woman's personal choice to herself and not the government deciding for her.

And, the government basically telling her when life begins. The government needs to keep their nosiess out of private lives.

Also, if oyu are against marriage with regards to government benefits/insurance, then you should vote to ban the institution of marriage all together. I have feeling, however, you are not in favor gay rights no matter what political position you choose.

ALL Americans (or people for that matter) are born with the same rights and government has no legal or moral authority to treat some Americans differently under the law than others based on their race, religion, sexual orientation, age, or heritage.

Mark, The government is preventing homosexual Americans from going to a justice of the peace, picking up a marriage license, and getting married the exact same way as heterosexual Americans. They have made it illegal. That IS preventing them of exercising their equal right to marry any consenting person they choose.

Mark, The government is preventing homosexual Americans from going to a justice of the peace, picking up a marriage license, and getting married the exact same way as heterosexual Americans. They have made it illegal. That IS preventing them of exercising their equal right to marry any consenting person they choose.

As far as insurance goes, they are private entities and they are selling a product. They should be allowed to sell that product or not sell it to whomever they choose. But my guess is they would lose a lot of business if they acted socially irresponsibly. And it wouldn't be long before some company realized that gay couples typically have much more discretionary spending money and would offer them policies. In the end, the bottom line is what matters to them.

ALL real libertarians are natural rights advocates.

inurance/benefits gained from gay marriage.

yes I have answered your question. Everybody , regalrdless of who you are deserves equality and the right to lead a life they see fit. Everyobdy has the right to marry whom they choose of consenting age. The government, nor local governments cannot step in, alter the constitution, and change it eliminating a certain group of people taking away their rights and liberties. Everybody is BORN with equal rights. Natural rights. People who are against gay marrige also see this as an "agenda" for gay's to also want more - which ONLY equality and the smae rights which has been taken from. They only want social acceptance.

Marriage IS a right - it is NOT a permission. which is what society and the government has created.

Firthermore, the federal government is a monopoly and is NOT a private club. It's PUBLIC and it belongs every bit as much to homosexuals as it does to heterosexuals. The government is not here to limit rights, define rights, or infringe upon rights. It is here only to defend them. The government is OBLIGATED to treat all marriages exactly the same regardless of who is getting married. So if heterosexual marriages are legally recognized so should homosexual marriages. In fact there is no difference between the two. There is only marriage.

I use the term natural law a term to describe that everybody has equal rights and they everybody is born with equal rights regardless of who they are. You have not refuted any of what I said. It's a shame you're done debating - see ya!

The government mus respect everybody's rights- I agree!

You know very little about what it means to be a Libertarian.

www.lp.org

Meet some Gay Libertarians!

http://www.outrightusa.org/

And by the way, more Libertarians are in favor of Gay Marriage and Gay Equality than either Democrats or Republicans.

Okay, I would give you thumbs up now. But, I can't. :( Sorry. Thumbs up here though.

Answer 1

I think everyone is at least 2% libertarian in their thinking. The problem with libertarians is that they are the only ones who are usually more than 50% libertarian.

I am in favor of all aspects of giving gays equal rights. (I am gay.) But I am extremely concerned with distinguishing between the functions served by different branches of government -- legislative branch and judicial branch. I want legislatures to GIVE us gay people equal rights. I do not want the judicial branch of either the federal government or any state government to MISINTERPRET the already-existing laws (the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution; the equal protection clauses of any state constitutions) in order to say that gays already have had equal rights and nobody did anything about it until now. I have liberal views about what legislation I want to create, but I have conservative views about how to interpret already-existing law.

Where does a libertarian like yourself stand on that point? Do you believe that the U.S. Constitution or any state constitutions already gave us gay people the right to get married? How do libertarians interpret the Constitution? According to their wishful thinking or according to "the original intent."

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AqAIWAIFGLQ6YvTc9HeEpITty6IX?qid=20060908175423AAliALu&show=7#profile-info-d3d1f6e5f096f4a38fd7bfdab41b8a84aa
~~~~
I know what the government is doing. But you haven't answered my question. How does a libertarian interpret the Constitution?
~~~~
Okay, I can see from the way that you respond that you don't think in terms of law and the interpretation of law. Like Supreme Court Justice O.W. Holmes, Jr once said, "I have often said to my colleagues that I hate 'justice,' because I know when a man begins to talk like that he has shirked thinking in legal terms."

So I'll just close this non-debate with you by saying that if you believe that we gay people have "natural rights" that government must respect, then ask the forces of nature to do something to the government (a hurricane, an eathquake, a comet from space that collides with government, etc.).
~~~~
Okay, so I'll jump back in to this debate. I do know what libertarians stand for IN TERMS OF THEIR LEGISLATIVE goals. I understand that perfectly. But I do not know anything about how libertarians interpret the laws which are already on the books. I do not know how libertarian judges will interpret the Constitution.

I do like the link you provided. Because one of the things it says in there is "Ask Congress to repeal the don't ask, don't tell law." I like that statement a lot. I like that statement twice over. I do believe that "don't ask, don't tell" should be repealed. And, more importantly, I believe that it should be CONGRESS which does the repealling. I do not believe that the Supreme Court should misinterpret the Constitution, which it would be doing if it claimed to "strike down" the law.
~~~~
I have an essay entitled "How Far is a Judge Free in Rendering a Decision," delivered by a famous early-20th Century federal judge by the name of Learned Hand (yes, that really was his name). If you'd like to get a copy of that essay (It is 84 sentences long) you can email me at markdunlap64@yahoo
~~~
That looks like a very interesting article. I'll come back some time when I have more time and read it.

Answer 2

I'm a Libertarian, and I am neither Pro-Life nor Pro-Choice. I think labeling oneself as either is a statement that one fails to understand the question. The question is, "When does the fetus obtain rights that the state will protect?" and that should be answered by state legislatures. It doesn't matter which one I want if the question is going to be dictated by a court.

I also don't know what you mean by "Gay rights". Some mean "the right to marry". I do not support this because "marriage" is not a "right" for anybody. Marriage has more to do with government benefits than rights, and I see no reason why the government that extends those benefits cannot decide who should receive them, IF there is a rational basis to exclude some from eligibility. I find it possible that the government(s) can articulate such a rational basis. I therefore do not assume that "gay rights" includes eligibility for that which the legislature wants only to extend to heterosexuals.

Neither is a slam-dunk either way.

Gay marriage is NOT "equality". There exists under the law certain preferences that marriage gets. To extend those to same sex marriages is not "equality" as it does not eliminate the inequality the way doing away with the preferences entirely would. All recognizing gay marriage does is give a new class of people participation in the inequality.

If you think the abortion issue is about the question of when Life begins, you don't know enough about basic science to qualify as an "informed" opinion. I'd say that to Pro Life or Pro Choice people. Here's a clue: Life doesn't "begin".

Answer 3

Homophobic is a misused word. I do not like most gay people and I am not afraid of them. I just do not like them . I do not hate them. I just do not like them. Anyway, I do believe that women should have the right to choose what happens with their bodies and their pregnancies and their lives. Gays have all rights except for becoming married. It would be so much easier for an illegal immigrant to just say they are gay and fraudulently acquire a marraige license with a friend. (for example)

Answer 4

Your a Libertarian and believe exactly as I do.

Answer 5

People do not have special rights just because they are gay.

Answer 6

I agree with you. So,....yeah....I agree with you. Me too.