Although I can't say that I'm a Libertarian I believe in a lot of the ideals of Libertarians. I am very much against big government, but still feel we need some form of government. I am more of a conservative Constitutionalist in that I believe in following the U.S. Constitution and its Amendments. There are some amendments that I obey but do not necessarily agree with and some that I feel have been mis-interpertated. Even the SCOUS have ruled one way on the Constitution and years later reversed the decision, so it is obvious that not everyone speaks with one mind. I like and support the Libertarian view on nudism. I believe they feel if it feels good for you and it's not harming anyone, then do it. Government feels that they should have the authority and police power to impose their views upon every one in order to protect those who haven't indicated that they need protection. Big government also feels that it has the right to regulate, for a fee, how people can be nude or people can make money by exploiting nudism.
I used to be a supporter of the US Libertarian party. I stopped donating and subscribing to their newsletter when it began to get into stuff like Holocaust denial. I have been really attracted to the von-Hayek set of ideas. The government, as I saw and still see it, in line with classic libertarian thought, has a few specific roles that are hard to avoid if one is to have a livable society:
1. Guaranteeing contracts and property.
2. Collective defense.
3. A monopoly on force.
4. In what we call "industrial democracies" - inherently individualistic but economically integrated societies, it also needs to attend to market and workforce regulation, at least to an extent that limits the emergence of violent resistance to dislocation.
I don't think any of this is inherent or God-given; we're all just muddling through, looking for workable social relationships.
In working out the practical details of all of this, a Libertarian puritanism leads to some pretty twisted results. Should the government enforce a contract by which I sell myself into slavery? If my neighbor damages me by, say, unleashing a flood onto my property, classic theory says I should sue; popular theory says I should have built a flood wall; another popular theory says I should shoot the guy. But really, rather than violate #1, or #3, or allow the emergence of a body of judge-made law, isn't it more sensible to choose representatives to hammer out drainage and flood-control strategies?
(I choose this example because it was addressed in the laws of ancient Rome, and in the laws and legal practices of the first medieval cities, and continuously since then.)
So I've turned into something of a moderate, but one without any belief in the inherent legitimacy of government.
Although I can't say that I'm a Libertarian I believe in a lot of the ideals of Libertarians. I am very much against big government, but still feel we need some form of government. I am more of a conservative Constitutionalist in that I believe in following the U.S. Constitution and its Amendments. There are some amendments that I obey but do not necessarily agree with and some that I feel have been mis-interpertated. Even the SCOUS have ruled one way on the Constitution and years later reversed the decision, so it is obvious that not everyone speaks with one mind. I like and support the Libertarian view on nudism. I believe they feel if it feels good for you and it's not harming anyone, then do it. Government feels that they should have the authority and police power to impose their views upon every one in order to protect those who haven't indicated that they need protection. Big government also feels that it has the right to regulate, for a fee, how people can be nude or people can make money by exploiting nudism.
but the constitutionalists also oppose gay marriage and wants to criminalize "offensive sexual behavior"
I'm a classic libertarian as described in the writings of the founding fathers of the USA. I'm opposed to many of the philosophies of all of the current political parties. I tend to be fiscally conservative, socially liberal, but rooted in personal responsibility and a small and unobtrusive government.
I consider myself a "socialtarian" - a libertarian who believes in social responsibility. There are things government is the appropriate venue for, but it needs to be transparent and limited to those things. The anarchist ideals of the more vocal libertarians are unworkable and result in a "might makes right" world that is the antithesis of freedom.
Although I can't say that I'm a Libertarian I believe in a lot of the ideals of Libertarians. I am very much against big government, but still feel we need some form of government. I am more of a conservative Constitutionalist in that I believe in following the U.S. Constitution and its Amendments. There are some amendments that I obey but do not necessarily agree with and some that I feel have been mis-interpertated. Even the SCOUS have ruled one way on the Constitution and years later reversed the decision, so it is obvious that not everyone speaks with one mind. I like and support the Libertarian view on nudism. I believe they feel if it feels good for you and it's not harming anyone, then do it. Government feels that they should have the authority and police power to impose their views upon every one in order to protect those who haven't indicated that they need protection. Big government also feels that it has the right to regulate, for a fee, how people can be nude or people can make money by exploiting nudism.
but the constitutionalists also oppose gay marriage and wants to criminalize "offensive sexual behavior"Although there is some overlap you are confusing the Christian conservatives with the Constitutionalists.
.... I do believe that gays should have the right to enter a similar union with all of the rights, privileges and responsibilities of marriage....
Separate but equal isa form of institutionalized discrimination deemed unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.