riddler78 saidOk I just read what you had to say.. Now I'm gonna ask you a simple question.. as a libertarian of course.
TropicalMark saidI find it very interesting that none of the 'conservative/republicans' have uttered a peep in the thread concerning what happened yesterday in NC...........
And oh btw, socal.. Queens/Brooklyn NY is NOT, and I repeat NOT your expertise. There is no way in hell you can 'know' the dynamics of what took place. If you want to gloat and celebrate, then I URGE you to open your trap in any of the NC threads.. I dare you.
As a libertarian, I think this is a decision that would damage the economy of NC and ultimately hurt NC in the mid term if passed. But I think it is a decision that should be at the state level. Though - I'm sure you're equally aware that President Obama opposes gay marriage and has had a similar view to GW Bush on the issue - that there should be civil unions (a position that I used to have before recognizing that in the absence of civil unions, there should be gay marriage - but I am more for civil unions for all than gay marriage given that the state should have no place in marriage beyond the contractual arrangement).
But at the same time, New York State has passed gay marriage - over time, I'm pretty sure the position in NC will change - as it's a simple matter of demographics. No matter your socio economic background, blue state, red state, republican or democrat or other, a significant majority of the young believe that there should be gay marriage and/or civil unions.
As for gloating and celebrating, there is nothing to celebrate in the fact that this race was won largely because the US economy is in the crapper and looks like it is going to get worse. It's a hollow triumph of ideas at best.
How then does it set well with this "We hold that all individuals have the right to exercise sole dominion over their own lives, and have the right to live in whatever manner they choose, so long as they do not forcibly interfere with the equal right of others to live in whatever manner they choose. I Noticed your disdain was about NC economy.. Well that rather telling isnt it?
Now lets go here:We, on the contrary, deny the right of any government to do these things, and hold that where governments exist, they must not violate the rights of any individual: namely, (1) the right to life -- accordingly we support the prohibition of the initiation of physical force against others; (2) the right to liberty of speech and action -- accordingly we oppose all attempts by government to abridge the freedom of speech and press, as well as government censorship in any form; and (3) the right to property -- accordingly we oppose all government interference with private property, such as confiscation, nationalization, and eminent domain, and support the prohibition of robbery, trespass, fraud, and misrepresentation. Well???
Or, heres the big one:Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or
restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships. Notice that ALL italicized paragraphs quoted are taken directly from the ... drum roll please... The Libertairian Party's platform site http://www.lp.org/platform
Sorry riddler, but you can't pull that bullshit republican crap wool over everyone's eyes. Nothing, and i repeat nothing you've ever said is in line with the 'libertarian' view point. You care only for money, yourself, and more money.. everyone's 'liberty' be damned.
First, the Libertarian Party is a name - it doesn't represent all libertarians. Second, I don't see anything in there that conflicts at all with what you claim to be my ideals. I think the money creates the incentive - but also understand that the money comes from the fact there is demand rather than the other way around. In this case, the incentives have been naturally created to do what's right. Further - even the passage you cite is consistent with what I've said: "Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or
restrict personal relationships."
The government has no place in defining what marriage is and is not - because within the role of government marriage is only a contractual arrangement and should not be a reflection of values being imposed - changing it to civil unions that are indiscriminating then for all recognizes it as such. What place after all, should government have between one of your most relationships - that of your partner for life and God (if you believe in one)?
But back to the topic at hand, again, this cannot be seen as anything but a problem for Obama - but in doing so, it is also a reflection of how horrible the economy is and how bad it may continue to get.