Quote from Orangeman

.

Why thank you sir for giving in and proving my entire point ......

.......

.

Display More

and thank you for verifying why I am against the two primary parties in they. country - Republicans and Democrats both only want freedom when it allows their side to tell the other side what to do - you want freedom to be a one way street where you get the rights you want but only so long as you can control what rights everyone else gets

to basically post that you could never support the Libertarian party because you think they support pedohellia only shows your ignorance - so thank you for standing up and reconfirming that you are in fact completely uninformed and ignorant to what the libertarian party stands for

you are no different than the Democrats

are you sure you are not Bigdog

Quote from Edward Neal

and thank you for verifying why I am against the two primary parties in they. country - Republicans and Democrats both only want freedom when it allows their side to tell the other side what to do - you want freedom to be a one way street where you get the rights you want but only so long as you can control what rights everyone else gets

to basically post that you could never support the Libertarian party because you think they support pedohellia only shows your ignorance - so thank you for standing up and reconfirming that you are in fact completely uninformed and ignorant to what the libertarian party stands for

you are no different than the Democrats

are you sure you are not Bigdog

Display More

And here I thought you said goodbye......

Just can't resist personal attacks and basing your argument on feeling rather than facts, now who does that sound like.

Although you skillfully worked political, personal, religious, and racial attacks in to less than 5 replies so bravo.

Please sir, provide a quote were I specifically stated what you claim.

..........

Here.....let me help......

.

LOL. I was checking on this thread today, to see if anyone is talking about Public Square now being traded on the stock market.

Quote from Bill Martin

Orangeman & Edward Neal I been watching you guys discussion and I think you are close to agreeing than not. I see the points you both are trying to make and l get it. Since age of consent was raised I have a question for you guys. Go back a hundred years and a girl who wasn’t married by age 14 was considered an old maid. Obviously government was just fine with it then. When government decides age of consent was 18 - who decided that. Fast forward to now - obviously I don’t want to see a 40 - 50 year old male prey on teenage girls but I got a problem when an -18 year old gets caught sleeping with a 17 year old and his life is ruined. IMO this law could use a serious overhaul - what you guys think??

Counselor I was only using it as an extreme example of a "freedom" a small part of society is claiming we are denying them that I personally feel we have the place to deny them. This position was not meant to support or debate their argument but rather to prove out that not impeding on anyone's "freedom" .... or their perception of the same....is an impossible fantasy. As previously mentioned for a society to function there must be rules and with that someone's perception of "freedom" will be questioned.

If your debate classes were anything like mine we were forced to argue the opposite position of things we strongly felt which was a great tool to solidify our argument to eventualy support our position when reversed.

I don't take debate personally but guess that is a learned skill......

......

.

Quote from Bill Martin

IMO this law could use a serious overhaul - what you guys think??

Uncle BillyBob!!!...............

(Did you run out of Bourbon? You want them to continue?)

ORDER IN THE COURT!!

Quote from Bill Martin

Orangeman & Edward Neal I been watching you guys discussion and I think you are close to agreeing than not. I see the points you both are trying to make and l get it. Since age of consent was raised I have a question for you guys. Go back a hundred years and a girl who wasn’t married by age 14 was considered an old maid. Obviously government was just fine with it then. When government decides age of consent was 18 - who decided that. Fast forward to now - obviously I don’t want to see a 40 - 50 year old male prey on teenage girls but I got a problem when an -18 year old gets caught sleeping with a 17 year old and his life is ruined. IMO this law could use a serious overhaul - what you guys think??

yes I do believe our laws need an overhaul, but to your example of the 18 year old and his 17 year old girl friend - -

right out of the libertarian political platform

1.7 Crime and Justice

Government force must be limited to the protection of the rights of individuals to life, liberty, and property, and governments must never be permitted to violate these rights. Laws should be limited in their application to violations of the rights of others through force or fraud, or to deliberate actions that place others involuntarily at significant risk of harm. Therefore, we favor the repeal of all laws creating “crimes” without victims, such as gambling, the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes, and consensual transactions involving sexual services. We support restitution to the victim to the fullest degree possible at the expense of the criminal or the negligent wrongdoer. The constitutional rights of the criminally accused, including due process, a speedy trial, legal counsel, trial by jury, and the legal presumption of innocence until proven guilty, must be preserved. We assert the common-law right of juries to judge not only the facts but also the justice of the law. We oppose the prosecutorial practice of “over-charging” in criminal prosecutions so as to avoid jury trials by intimidating defendants into accepting plea bargains. Additionally, we support the abolition of qualified immunity so that law enforcement and prosecutors would be held legally accountable for misconduct that leads to wrongful convictions or other acts of injustice.

I think that bolded part covers the 18 and 17 year old - - yes, she might not be a legal adult, but where would be the justice in treating it as a crime?

personal liberty & economic liberty - - these are the primary desires of the libertarian party, where as the D's and the R's want an authoritarian government than can limit one or both of these things - - read the party platform here:

https://www.lp.org/platform/

as a side note, I think we are now living in a very confused world when it comes to how we deal with young people. The lines as to at what age a young person reaches an age where they are mature enough to make reasonable decisions seems to be all over the place - - the left with their pro trans movement wants to let pre teens decide if they want to self mutilate to change their gender and some of those same people would like to raise the age for gun ownership up to 21 for all guns - - seriously??

As noted in the Libertarian Party platform, I am against the idea of government enforced victimless crimes. and I think most would agree that grooming people for sex no matter what the age is not victimless

.....

.

Quote from Orangeman

.....

.

I have an idea - you say you like to debate, well how about you actually read the party platform - https://www.lp.org/platform/ - - - and then tell me exactly which parts you disagree with - its not perfect and I dont agree 100% with it, but at least I have read it and I find I agree with more of it than I do with any other parties platform. Also I guess I have gotten to the age where voting my principals is more important that voting for the better of two evils - - so no need to tell me "you cant win" - - personally if I dont vote my principals I have already lost.

As a side note that video had some good stuff in it especially the second half - - did you watch the entire thing??

Quote from Edward Neal

I have an idea - you say you like to debate, well how about you actually read the party platform - https://www.lp.org/platform/ - - -

Words on a page mean nothing when party leadership can't agree on what they stand for and it has been taken over by people who are watering it down and wokifying it in an attempt to become popular. When the likes of Justin Amash is one of the main party drivers....Justin Amash.....and it looks like their '24 candidate will be a comedian you have to admit it's pretty funny to criticize the other parties. .

The problem has never been the platform or grass root members but rather the leadership that either is just there for self promotion, or are simply a bunch of chuckleheads. While the written platform sounds great for the most part just as much of it will never work in the real world and history proves that out. Hell this group of their own states delegates proves it.

Yes I watched the entire video and couldn't believe it was done by a supporting outlet and this was a national party conference. The disarray was comical, seemed more like a bunch of high school girls arguing about a prom theme and the leadership is just like the rest of the high level politicians from all the other parties, they all suck.

You asked.

......

.

Quote from Orangeman

Words on a page mean nothing when party leadership can't agree on what they stand for and it has been taken over by people who are watering it down and wokifying it in an attempt to become popular. When the likes of Justin Amash is one of the main party drivers....Justin Amash.....and it looks like their '24 candidate will be a comedian you have to admit it's pretty funny to criticize the other parties. .

The problem has never been the platform or grass root members but rather the leadership that either is just there for self promotion, or are simply a bunch of chuckleheads. While the written platform sounds great for the most part just as much of it will never work in the real world and history proves that out. Hell this group of their own states delegates proves it.

Yes I watched the entire video and couldn't believe it was done by a supporting outlet and this was a national party conference. The disarray was comical, seemed more like a bunch of high school girls arguing about a prom theme and the leadership is just like the rest of the high level politicians from all the other parties, they all suck.

You asked.

......

.

Display More

so you dont wish to actually talk about the platform - - - - and talking about disarray have you tried to read the republican platform? - - I just did, they didnt publish one last convention because they couldn't agree on anything - in the end they posted this -

"

OUR PLATFORM

Republicans believe in liberty, economic prosperity, preserving American values and traditions, and restoring the American dream for every citizen of this great nation. As a party, we support policies that seek to achieve those goals.

Our platform is centered on stimulating economic growth for all Americans, protecting constitutionally-guaranteed freedoms, ensuring the integrity of our elections, and maintaining our national security. We are working to preserve America's greatness for our children and grandchildren.

The Republican Party's legacy -- we were originally founded in 1854 for the purpose of ending slavery -- compels us to patriotically defend America's values. As the left attempts to destroy what makes America great, the Republican Party is standing in the breach to defend our nation and way of life

thats it - - no detail whatsoever - I guess they think they need simple things for simple minds - dont want to confuse with details now do they? and if you click on the more info link you get this = gibberish

so at least the Libertarian party actually has the balls to publish a detailed platform and go into some detail as to where they stand on almost every issue - - and the Republicans at best say "we support Trumps agenda, but we might change that at the 2024 convention"

all I can say is WOW!!!

so your for the party that couldn't even come up with a detailed party platform at their convention - - - so you support the party that wont publish a detailed party platform and think I am wrong in supporting a party that does - - - - - - - okay thanks

you dont like words on a piece of paper - - makes total sense now - considering the Republicans couldn't even put the words on paper last convention - - - apparently the republicans are the party with no platform - - until the perhaps change their minds in 2024

what a joke!!! - funny thing is that Trump was more of a Libertarian than a Republican - - the Party much prefers Republicans like Mitt Romney and John McCain - - those two are/were party line Republicans

Quote from Edward Neal

so your for the party .....

Once again you are confused and have let your emotions and assumptions get the better of you. Although I must admit I enjoy your tagents and after that video can understand more why you relate.

I support people, not parties, and am not, or ever have been, a member of any.

For clarification please refer back to the last statement in my previous reply.

........

.