Libertarians: Consistent but Extremist
Libertarians live in an imaginary world of political theory. There is a
certain philosophical or theoretical consistency in being laissez-faire on
social issues as well as economic issues.
Thomas Jefferson, the architect of American democracy, was politically
laissez-faire on all religious belief AND disbelief, saying: The legitimate
powers of government extend to such acts as are only injurious to others.
But it does no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no
god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.”
Rather than advocate a return to alcohol Prohibition along with the current
prohibition of other drugs in order to be consistent in the drug war,
libertarians like Milton Friedman, being laissez-faire on social issues as
well as economic issues, have called for drug legalization.
Nearly 75 percent of the drug war is directed solely against marijuana,
which is safer than alcohol and/or tobacco.
And polls show a majority of Americans (58 percent) now favoring an end to
marijuana prohibition.
Even conservatives like William F. Buckley have called for an end to
marijuana prohibition.
Jim Frey of Berkeley Pro-Life, a nondrinker like myself, claims he's a
libertarian and not a Republican.
He graciously accepted back issues of James Dawson's pro-life / animal
rights / libertarian 'zine Live and Let Live from me, as well as contact
information on Libertarians For Animal Rights (LFAR), which is pro-life as
well as pro-animal.
When I told him someone wrote in to Live and Let Live in the late '90s,
referring to libertarians as "Republicans who do drugs," Jim merely reacted
with mild amusement, saying it's a common misconception to equate
libertarians with Republicans...
...whereas Rachel MacNair, a vegan, Quaker pacifist, past president of
Feminists For Life, and a political liberal, broke up laughing when I
related these words to her!
And Rachel didn't understand what distinguishing abortion from arguably
victimless crimes like drugs and prostitution had to do with nonviolence or
peace towards animals and humans...
On the other hand, Carol Crossed of Democrats For Life could appreciate the
distinction: many on the religious right link their opposition to abortion
to a religious agenda (e.g., school prayer), and to many of us on the
secular left, this makes abortion look like a "religious" issue, rather than
a secular human rights issue.
Conservatives claim to oppose the "nanny state," or "big government"
intervening in the bedroom and/or bathroom (electronic surveillance), but
religious right issues like school prayer and intrusion into the internal
affairs of minority religions indicate they're anything but laissez-faire on
religious belief AND disbelief!
By 2003, I'd already written extensively on political issues: in letters to
my local newspapers, the Tri-Valley Herald and later in the Oakland Tribune;
in Harmony: Voices for a Just Future, a "consistent-ethic" periodical on the
religious left, and in the Stanislaus Connections, a monthly peace and
justice newspaper out of Modesto, CA.
Conservatives led an effort to remove pro-choice Democrat Gray Davis from
office as governor of California. A recall election to replace Gray Davis
took place in 2003.
I thought about running for office in the 2003 recall election (only a small
fee of a few hundred dollars was required), and mentioned that in passing to
my friend Ruth, and her response indicated among the porn stars and other
celebrities others running for office, I'd be a virtual unknown!
I voted for Daniel Ramirez, a pro-life Democrat out of San Diego in the 2003
California recall election. He came in 43rd place out of 135 candidates. Not
bad.
On the other hand, Jim Frey was pleased when the California recall election
in 2003 pushed pro-choice Democrat Gray Davis out of office, even though
Gray Davis was replaced not with a pro-lifer, but with pro-choice Republican
Arnold Schwarzenegger.
If pro-life Republicans and/or pro-life libertarians prefer pro-choice
Republicans over pro-life Democrats, this strikes me as mere partisan
politics.
If pro-lifers really want to end abortion, opposition to abortion is going
to have to come from across the political spectrum (Democrats, Greens,
etc.), and not just from the far right.
I personally find the libertarian position distasteful, because although
like liberals, libertarians are laissez-faire on all religious belief AND
disbelief and are laissez-faire on social issues, I disagree with the
libertarians being laissez-faire on economic issues.
I would refer you to Tom Hartmann's 2003 book, What Would Jefferson Do?,
which is a response not just to the religious right (which is too often tied
to the economic right), but to economic conservatives as well.
Tom Hartmann points out that our tax dollars support an infrastructure we
Americans take for granted:
...public education, schools, roads, state hospitals, environmental
protection, occupational safety, etc.
Libertarianism would abandon Americans to a heartless individualism...
Rose Evans, editor and publisher of Harmony: Voices for a Just Future, a
"consistent-ethic" periodical on the religious left, specifically cited the
example of libertarians wanting to abolish public education as an example of
libertarianism being an extremist philosophy...
...whereas at a Berkeley Pro-Life meeting about a decade ago, Jim Frey and
the beautiful pro-life activist Teddi Ivey (I'm thinking she's a
Republican?) said abolishing public education was a good idea!
Bill Maher is on the board of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
(PETA), he says he's libertarian and not liberal, and as an atheist, he
attacks all religion...
Whereas PETA websites www.jewishveg.com
- www.jesusveg.com -
www.islamveg.com are clearly aimed at
the Abrahamic faiths, courting the religious community for inspiration,
blessings and support.
A Christian wrote in to www.jesusveg.com
around 1999 or 2000, asking PETA: how can you focus on some parts of
Scripture while ignoring other parts?!
I dunno. Christians do this all the time!
Like revering the apostle Paul for dismissing his previous adherence to the
Law as "so much garbage," while ignoring verses from the Pauline epistles
like "flee fornication," and "do not make provisions for the flesh to
gratify its cravings," etc.
Boy, they "believe"!
During the 1980s, Dennis Mikinzi, an agnostic schoolteacher in Ohio,
published Biblical Errancy, a newsletter debunking the Bible by pointing out
its flaws and contradictions, while giving equal time for biblical
apologists to air their views.
(unlike pro-lifers, flooding the airwaves -- no pun intended! -- with
anti-veg and anti-animal sound bites, without giving equal time to animal
rights as a serious moral, political, and theological issue.)
At one point, Dennis told a Christian who had written in, "It's possible to
discuss one's cherished beliefs with one's opponents without resorting to
personal attacks... Just ask Reagan and Gorbachev!"
Quite true. I've had many friendly conversations over dinner, and at the
Berkeley Pro-Life meetings with Jim & Liza Frey and the beautiful Teddi
Ivey!
And if we're all opposed to abortion, we shouldn't be opponents, but merely
advocating different strategies to end the crisis!
Democrats For Life of America, 601 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, South Building,
Suite 900, Washington, DC 20004 (202)220-3066
Go on to: Lies and Deception
Return to: Articles
