[TheRealThing]

[quote=TheRealThing]You'll count on one hand future Independent converts. Consider this, almost all of the practical issues/goals of your platform could conceivably be reallized within the conservative Teaparty movement of our time. The social planks of the Libertarian platform are "off the wall". John Lennon's song "Imagine" really does roll up the Libertarian view in a nice little navel lint ball. No right or wrong, nothing to live and die for and no religion too, etc.

The founding fathers gave us a constitutional government framed with moral principal. Honoring the Almighty put us in a position to be blessed by Him over the years in peacetime and war. Supporting open drug use and a host of other rediculous, destructive and deviant acts isn't going to endear most folks around the midwest. Sidestepping personal responsibility and supposing a nation could live in a sublimely sterile, amoral, social landscape are the musings of fiction. Best example of the society (you all say world) evisioned by the Libertarian I can think of are the Eloi in HG Wells' "Time Machine". Sublimely indiffernt to everything, and everybody doing whatever they want until those old nasty Morlocks came to eat them. Man is fallen, sin will always cause war and strife, mendacity will always be his defining characteristic. There will always be a price to pay for choosing to ignore our Creator, and in case you haven't noticed the payments are getting too big to manage.[/QUOTE]

Just my opinion on this one... Luckily, I believe that the price was to big for all of mankind to pay, in fact we coud not pay it at all, but, because my Creator sent his Son to pay that price. However, I believe that I should like my Creator should give man the choice to choose, instead of forcing my personal belief on to man. I will help my fellow man in any way that I can not even because I want to, because I am commanded to do so, or at least I believe that I am.

Also, on a personal note, I would have left S.Ky, long ago, if I did not believe that it is a responsiblity for myself to be here and try to make life better for my fellow citizens. Just for the record, we have 2 out of the top 15 poorest counties in the entire U.S., forget, third world, look at our back door. We have people who choose to do nothing, yet, there are is no responsiblity to be held by them.

The drug thing:

We have people who do drugs, yet, I am forced to take care of them once they go to jail, then, they go right back to doing the exact same thing, and I will once again be forced to take care of them in jail, where is the responsiblity in this. Would it not be better to legalize it, they will die, yes, that is more than likely of an outcome for these people. However, it will still be the outcome for these people the way it currently is as well. So why should I burden a tax payer until that person dies, because I believe it is wrong? Instead, should I not try with a local church help break the addiction of an individual who chooses to do so.

I would rather die a free man to choose the way I live than to be forced to live a way I disagree with... I know many of you feel the same way... because of that belief I am a Libertarian.

Okay we have some common ground. Your Libertarian position on choice is redundant though. Our Creator gave us the gift of choice when we were born into this world. Whether or not someone says THEY offer the option to choose is irrelevant. Further, this power of choice, is the basis for The Judgement awaiting us all. We choose Christ, which is the only route to savation, or we follow our own star, which puts one on one of the many routes to destruction.

Either way, saying that government should provide a user friendly evironment for those who would drug themselves into a life long twilight zone is absurd on the face of it. Tax payers become burdened as you put it because the drug users create an undersireable and unsafe environment for the rest of us and our children. Ensuring safe and secure cities, shopping malls, schools and in our case, the whole USA, really is a true function of government. People are free to choose in our country. They can freely go out, get drunk and then unfortunately drive their car. That's when they violate my rights, and I believe they should suffer for that choice. That's what our government does, enforce laws to protect the people.

I believe in choice, I'm all about choice. For instance, I am all for women's rights to Choose when it comes to their body, so I'm pro choice. What I stand totally against is this; a woman chooses to engage in behavior that causes her to become pregnant, she then decides to abort the child within her citing her right to choose. May I further demonstrate the point? If one drives drunk and kills somebody, he should lose his right to be free and go to jail. If one decides to be sexually involved and becomes pregnant she should not be allowed to kill the innocent unborn within her. In other words when personal choices hurt other people they are wrong. A woman's right to choose doesn't mean she has the right to decide to abort her baby, that's another PERSON we're talking about.

Here we come to common ground again, government does not have the right, and should not have the authority, to make it legal or otherwise assist people, including funding abortion, to do things that are wrong.

Now, getting back to nuclear power. Again, I think it is justifiably a function of government to oversee and regulate the use of nuclear power. I believe nuclear power is a much needed source of energy in our country. Additionally, I believe the risk involved can be made low enough to be a safe energy source for the USA, by government oversight.