Ron Paul: A TRUE Libertarian! NO LAWS Legislating Morality!

Ron Paul A TRUE Libertarian!
     Lawrence O'Donnell claims that Ron Paul is a "Fake" Libertarian because he believes pre-marital sex is "immoral." Ron Paul = NO SEX LAWS!
by Natalie Schultz
(libertarian)
Friday, February 24, 2012
   
      On Thursday, February 23, 2012, the day after the last Republican debate, Lawrence O’Donnell, a self-declared "Socialist" attempted to make the case that Ron Paul is a "Fake Libertarian" because he believes that sex outside of marriage is immoral. Funny, during the debate over The Pill, I actually EXPECTED Ron Paul to make that very claim; that it is not "contraception" that is the problem, but the moral driving-force that makes people want to use it. Ron Paul is a Christian, this is well known. Ron Paul is also a TRUE Libertarian, and as such he engaged in his First Amendment Right to express his OPINION, which is based on his Constitutionally-protected religious beliefs. Ron Paul DID NOT, EVER ONCE, say that he would LEGISLATE HIS MORAL VIEWS ON ANY AMERICAN.
      Lawrence O’Donnell chose to reference Penn Jillette, a well-known "Libertarian" to make his case, citing Jillette’s "sex positive" attitude. That’s great! Ironic that "sex positive" is a term coined by women in the sex-industry who have been fighting against the forces of LIBERAL "feminists" who believe that the sex-industry is "anti-feminist" and "IMMORAL!" I side 100% with the sex-positive, pro-porn, pro-prostitution women who CHOOSE to go into that field of work by their own FREE WILL. Ironic, since SO DOES RON PAUL! More ironic, it is O’Donnell’s allies on the LEFT who are so intent on keeping the sex-industry over-regulated and illegal by claiming that it "subjugates" women for the benefit of men. Yeah, Rick Santorum wants to keep it illegal too, but I’m the LAST person who will be defending that dick-head; but it is the "liberal feminists" who try to LEGISLATE THEIR VIEW OF MORALITY on the rest of us who are the REAL THREAT to society, especially since the Religious-Right has already lost their public-approval battle, so they are not truly a threat to me or anyone else.
      Let’s get the definition of "Libertarian" straight, once and for all!

     A "Libertarian" is a HUMAN, first and foremost, and by their very nature ALL humans have PERSONAL OPINIONS, based on their life experiences, including religious beliefs and morals. Therefore, when having a personal discussion with a self-declared "Libertarian" one is bound to hear every version of what one may or may not consider "moral" from the far-Left to the far-Right.
     A "Libertarian" is a TRUE Libertarian if, and ONLY IF he or she is 100% willing to set aside his or her own personal views when it comes to THE LAW and how any legislation will interfere with an INDIVIDUAL’S RIGHT to make his or her own decisions based on his or her OWN PERSONAL moral views.
    Therefore, a pro-gay Libertarian does NOT support "gay-marriage" or any other kind of "marriage" because, first "marriage" is NOT in the Constitution at all, but more importantly, government-sanctioned "marriage" by definition devalues the INDIVIDIUAL, and the Constitution specifically protects each of us as an INDIVIDUAL, not "couples" or "triples" or pairs or whatever else "marriage" may eventually come to encompass. On the flip-side, an anti-gay libertarian would NEVER justify the government defining "marriage" as between one man and one woman, for the same reason. A TRUE Libertarian believes in CONTRACT LAW – that ANY two or more consenting persons can enter into a contract, thereby CHOOSING to share their benefits and wealth with whomever he or she chooses. The Government’s ONLY ROLE is to PROTECT the CONTRACT between those INDIVIDUALS. So, no, the government cannot make any laws that prevent or force one individual from sharing benefits or visiting each other in the hospital. As for children, again, the CONTRACT rules, and if two or more people agree to share responsibility for the children, then the government’s ONLY ROLE is to make sure that all parties uphold their end of the contract. "Marriage" can only be defined and recognized by religious institutions INDEPENDENT OF THE STATE!
      So, regarding marriage, Ron Paul, who defends INDIVIDUALS, not "groups," and CONTRACTS, is a TRUE Libertarian, whereas Gary Johnson, who doesn"t want the GOVERNMENT to DEFINE "gay-marriage" as a "Constitutional Right" is on track.  As for The Defense of Marriage Act, Ron Paul only supported it because as long as the Federal Government insists on recognizing "marriage," then DOMA is the only way to protect the First Amendment of religious institutions, where "marriage" itself Constitutionally belongs. It was a bad bill, but as long as the Federal government refuses to uphold the Constitution and GET OUT OF THE MARRIAGE BUSINESS, then he had no real choice but to support it. DOMA was the only, albeit highly contorted, way to uphold the Constitution against an unconstitutional law (state marriage certification).
As for sex, drugs and morality, Ron Paul is a very socially-conservative person PERSONALLY, yet he is 100% against ANY laws that outlaw such activity. So, he supports legalized prostitution and drugs. How many of Lawrence O’Donnell’s buddies on the Left can actually make that claim?
As for Abortion, this is where Libertarians differ, and legitimately. This was O’Donnell’s other big beef against Ron Paul; that he is anti-abortion. Well, gee, Ron Paul is an actual OB/GYN, and therefore he personally knows for a FACT that abortion is the murder of a LIFE, so he is opposed to it. I happen to agree with Ron Paul, that abortion IS murder, but no matter how I come at it, I just cannot justify the government making abortion illegal (although I do agree that Roe vs. Wade was a violation of State’s Rights). Libertarians For Life believe that the fetus has EQUAL RIGHTS to any born human being, and this is a legitimate legal (and scientific) claim. Some Libertarians view the women’s right to privacy over the baby’s right to Life as more important. That is why the Libertarian Party does NOT take a stand on either side in its platform. Personally, I side with the Right to Privacy, and as a woman, I do not see it as a "woman’s" Right anymore than I see the raising of children as a Parental (not societal / community / governmental) Right, and Parental Rights are an extension of INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, and ALL Individuals have a Right to PRIVACY from government interference in ALL aspects of their lives, whether in their bedroom, backyard or doctor’s office.
      Never-mind that Judge Andrew Napolitano is an unapologetic Pro-Life Libertarian, and I have never heard anyone question The Judge’s Libertarianism. And his show was cancelled by Fox BECAUSE his truly Libertarian views were waking Americans up and that made him a THREAT to the Right-Left / Republican-Democrat CORPORA-FASCIST STATE!
     As far as I am concerned, a TRUE Libertarian proves him or herself by actively opposing any legislation that upholds his or her own PERSONAL views, because a TRUE Libertarian understands that "morality" can NEVER be legislated by the government, but can only be PROTECTED by the government when the government STAYS OUT of ALL our PRIVATE LIVES, and diligently upholds the First Amendment by letting religious institutions and individuals FREELY EXPRESS THEIR OWN BELIEFS.
    So, O’Donnell, I must say, you are DEAD WRONG! Penn Jillette may very well be "sex-positive," but unlike your brethren on the Left who dictate that children MUST be provided with sex "education," contraceptives and abortions WITHOUT PARENTAL CONSENT, thereby imposing their own view that teen sex is "empowering" and "moral," Penn Jillette does NOT advocate LEGISLATING his PERSONAL BELIEFS on ANYONE ELSE!
       O’Donnell, you are a self-proclaimed "Socialist." In reality you and you Liberal-Elite friends are nothing more than FASCISTS who seek to OUTLAW any concept of "morality" with which you disagree.
O’Donnell, to be quite frank, according to your logic, the definition of a "Libertarian" is simply someone who is pro-sex. No, not just pro-sex, but pro-EXTRAMARITAL sex. Honestly, I hate Liberals and Socialists, but even I would NEVER lay such a blanket statement across them, just because the MOST VOCAL        Leftists happen to be pro-extramarital sex. And sorry, not ALL Conservatives or Republicans are anti-sex as you and Rick Santorum would like the world to believe; that I know for a FACT, personally! Honestly, O’Donnell, you simply prove my point that there is NO DIFFERENCE between you and Rick Santorum: You both SCARE THE BLOODY HELL OUT OF ME!
Personally, I would love for Penn Jillette to debate you FACE-TO-FACE on just what it REALLY means to be a Libertarian.