If ET Libertarians champion the rights of individuals then why don't they...

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by OPTIONAL777, Feb 23, 2009.

  1. Support abortion:


    Support gay marriage:


    Rand explained her views in more detail. In her 1968 lecture, she said, "I do not approve of such practices or regard them as necessarily moral, but it is improper for the law to interfere with a relationship between consenting adults."

    Now a true libertarian can personally not approve of the behavior of another person, i.e. Rand's hatred of homosexuality was should have finally been put to rest after the time of her death when her main follower had to admit that ignorance was at the bottom of her bigotry:

    Although Rand offered no further rationale for her opinion, her designated successor Nathaniel Branden dutifully followed her lead for a time — with equally little rationale. But Branden gradually changed his views as did many others through the 1970s and 1980s.

    By 1983, a year after Rand died, Branden was willing to say that she was “absolutely and totally ignorant” about homosexuality, describing her view “as calamitous, as wrong, as reckless, as irresponsible, and as cruel, and as one which I know has hurt too many people who ... looked up to her and assumed that if she would make that strong a statement she must have awfully good reasons.”

    It took courage for Branden to speak up intelligently about the ignorance of Rand...

    My guess? Rand was a closet self loathing bisexual woman, but that's just a guess...

    The inconsistency in her view of libertarianism and gays remains a puzzle for many to this day.
  2. You are either with gay marriage, you you are against it...

    I rarely find the ET libertarians chiming in to support gay marriage rights for gays or in support of abortion.

    The hero of the Libertarians, Ron Paul is of course opposed to gay marriage and abortion on the basis of his religious beliefs, which of course presents a Randite example of inconsistency of thought.

  3. That I purposely stated a fallacy of false dilemma to illustrate the inconsistency of libertarians like Rand and Paul apparently flew right over your head.

    ET libertarians seem to have their pet projects but do not apply consistency across the board when it comes to individual rights, which makes them basically republicans with a fair amount of unresolved authority issues...

  4. Oh, I have read Paul's opinions, and find them inconsistent with true Libertarian principles.

    Just because he was a doctor doesn't make him qualified to determine when life begins, nor qualified to determine the rights a woman has over her own biological processes in the private relationship with her doctor.

    Paul is a card carrying right wing all things Christian, which should not be a factor in his rational secular thinking if his principle is freedom of religion over his own personal religious biases.

    Libertarians may say they are pro choice, but again, I don't see the ET libertarian crowd stepping up to support the rights of women, nor do I see them stepping up to support the rights of gays to achieve equality with straights when it comes to the right of marriage.

    I see the ET junkie libertarian of course support his own cause junkie cause, and strangely mute when it comes to women's rights and/or gay rights.

    Which makes me think that libertarianism and/or Randite rationalizations being used as an excuse for pet projects, not a true philosophy which is applied equally to all people at all times in their struggle for human rights to be free of government intervention.

    Paul's obvious Christian bias can be seen here:


    To see the jew libertarian bias, just read the ET libertarian jews...

  5. Undignified questions like that don't get an answer from me.

    If you can't handle a rational discussion on its own merits, then I see no reason to pay your foolish nicoletrader style games...

  6. It is a puzzle only for gays .
  7. Logical inconsistency is a puzzle only for gays?

    Several ways to go with that one...

    Are you sure you even know which way you really want to go, or is there a deep seated homophobic in the closet self loathing denial at work in your mind?

  8. Thats because Ron Paul is a demagogic fruitcake, not a libertarian.