Comments on: The ongoing tensions between (some) religious right Republicans and libertarian Republicans http://www.rlc.org/tension-continues/ The Conscience of the Republican Party Fri, 26 Apr 2013 21:19:07 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Matt Heath http://www.rlc.org/tension-continues/comment-page-1/#comment-1274 Matt Heath Sun, 14 Jun 2009 00:43:23 +0000 http://www.rlc.org/?p=912#comment-1274 Why all the hate for the C4L? Why waste time even worrying about our minimal differences? Why do the work of the establishment, by dividing ourselves up? Let us wait until we are Jefferson and Hamilton; and then let us debate. Until then, lets work together when we can towards common goals. Personally, it seems to me that the C4L tries to limit discussion on social issues because of the tendancy of them being wedge and divisive issues. Plus, these issues are more individual and state issues, and the C4L is really a national organization working on national issues. Many state and local (unchartered) C4L organization may choose to work on local and state issues, but these too are usually not social issues but property rights and taxes and Consitutitonal Issues. I think creating a divide where none needs to be is doing NO GOOD! In Liberty, Matt Why all the hate for the C4L? Why waste time even worrying about our minimal differences? Why do the work of the establishment, by dividing ourselves up? Let us wait until we are Jefferson and Hamilton; and then let us debate. Until then, lets work together when we can towards common goals.

Personally, it seems to me that the C4L tries to limit discussion on social issues because of the tendancy of them being wedge and divisive issues. Plus, these issues are more individual and state issues, and the C4L is really a national organization working on national issues.

Many state and local (unchartered) C4L organization may choose to work on local and state issues, but these too are usually not social issues but property rights and taxes and Consitutitonal Issues.

I think creating a divide where none needs to be is doing NO GOOD!

In Liberty,
Matt

]]> By: Dave Nalle http://www.rlc.org/tension-continues/comment-page-1/#comment-1242 Dave Nalle Mon, 08 Jun 2009 04:23:17 +0000 http://www.rlc.org/?p=912#comment-1242 Dan, C4L's strategy appears to be to tell social conservatives that they ARE libertarians and not to worry about their complete violation of basic libertarian principles on every aspect of civil liberties. Dave Dan, C4L’s strategy appears to be to tell social conservatives that they ARE libertarians and not to worry about their complete violation of basic libertarian principles on every aspect of civil liberties.

Dave

]]> By: Daniel Sheill http://www.rlc.org/tension-continues/comment-page-1/#comment-1240 Daniel Sheill Mon, 08 Jun 2009 01:41:52 +0000 http://www.rlc.org/?p=912#comment-1240 Further, social conservatives did not ruin the GOP. Social conservatives have been a bedrock of the party for the better. But compare the old school social conservatives who led a clean life by example to the newer "born-again" culture warriors who believe that they need to change the laws of society in order to change the way people think. Those people are the problem. There is nothing wrong with the old school social conservatives who believed in the power of the church to change the hearts and minds of individuals to lead a better life. I'd much rather have our churches privately running the welfare systems of this country than our government. These people use persuasion, as opposed to coercion, which is the real sticking point for we libertarians. Please see Dave Nalle's most recent post about the religious right for an illustration of this. Need I mention that Ron Paul is a social conservative himself, but not one who wishes to dictate other people's lifestyles. Further, social conservatives did not ruin the GOP. Social conservatives have been a bedrock of the party for the better. But compare the old school social conservatives who led a clean life by example to the newer “born-again” culture warriors who believe that they need to change the laws of society in order to change the way people think. Those people are the problem. There is nothing wrong with the old school social conservatives who believed in the power of the church to change the hearts and minds of individuals to lead a better life. I’d much rather have our churches privately running the welfare systems of this country than our government. These people use persuasion, as opposed to coercion, which is the real sticking point for we libertarians. Please see Dave Nalle’s most recent post about the religious right for an illustration of this. Need I mention that Ron Paul is a social conservative himself, but not one who wishes to dictate other people’s lifestyles.

]]> By: Daniel Sheill http://www.rlc.org/tension-continues/comment-page-1/#comment-1239 Daniel Sheill Mon, 08 Jun 2009 01:28:45 +0000 http://www.rlc.org/?p=912#comment-1239 Well, it's not C4L's job to talk about any rift between social conservatives and libertarians. This is especially true since they do not want to upset the impression political coalition that they've formed. However, they at the same time have a responsibility not to exploit the word "libertarian" for their own purposes without remaining faithful to this word. C4L is far from being totally libertarian on social issues, yet their organization uses the URL libertarianrepublican.com. They often say nothing when many of their members oppose NAFTA, not because it undermines sovereignty and creates bureaucracy, but rather because the whole concept of free trade, in their estimation, kills too many manufacturing jobs here. That's not to say that nonlibertarians should not be welcomed in their group. However, their organization needs to do a better job educating their followers about what libertarianism is really all about. Because many of their members are quite ignorant of the philosophy but continue to advocate many non-libertarian things in the name of C4L. A mere disclaimer on the C4L website is not good enough to clear this problem up. Well, it’s not C4L’s job to talk about any rift between social conservatives and libertarians. This is especially true since they do not want to upset the impression political coalition that they’ve formed. However, they at the same time have a responsibility not to exploit the word “libertarian” for their own purposes without remaining faithful to this word. C4L is far from being totally libertarian on social issues, yet their organization uses the URL libertarianrepublican.com. They often say nothing when many of their members oppose NAFTA, not because it undermines sovereignty and creates bureaucracy, but rather because the whole concept of free trade, in their estimation, kills too many manufacturing jobs here. That’s not to say that nonlibertarians should not be welcomed in their group. However, their organization needs to do a better job educating their followers about what libertarianism is really all about. Because many of their members are quite ignorant of the philosophy but continue to advocate many non-libertarian things in the name of C4L. A mere disclaimer on the C4L website is not good enough to clear this problem up.

]]>