Libertarian Candidate Richard Ehrbar helps push for Ohio equal marriage rights referendum

[RPWontBackDown]

While campaigning in the election for the 3rd U.S. Congressional District in Columbus, Libertarian candidate Richard Ehrbar also aims to spread liberty by aiding Freedom to Marry Ohio’s initiative to overturn the state’s 2004 amendment that now excludes same-sex marriage as a legal form of union.

Read the rest here:
http://www.examiner.com/article/lib...h-for-ohio-equal-marriage-rights-referendum-1

 

[FrankRep]

Richard Ehrbar should just run as a Democrat.

 

[jkob]

Good. There shouldn't be a restriction of how you can and can't marry. The amendments to the state constitutions banning same sex unions around the country rightfully should be overturned.

 

[erowe1]

Whatever his reason is for this position, he shouldn't lie and say that it has anything to do with spreading liberty.

 

[Smart3]

While campaigning in the election for the 3rd U.S. Congressional District in Columbus, Libertarian candidate Richard Ehrbar also aims to spread liberty by aiding Freedom to Marry Ohio’s initiative to overturn the state’s amendment that now excludes same-sex marriage as a legal form of union.

Read the rest here:
http://www.examiner.com/article/lib...h-for-ohio-equal-marriage-rights-referendum-1

This is great news.

Richard Ehrbar should just run as a Democrat.

Democrats don't believe in liberty, and their reasons for supporting equality are stupid.

Whatever his reason is for this position, he shouldn't lie and say that it has anything to do with spreading liberty.

The Libertarian Party was the first place in Ohio to back this referendum. Libertarians strongly believe in liberty and equality, and if you disagree with this referendum, then you simply are not a libertarian.

 

[FrankRep]

Democrats don't believe in liberty, and their reasons for supporting equality are stupid.

Libertarians won't get elected.

 

[Smart3]

Libertarians won't get elected.

and your point is? I don't care if I have to wait 50 years to see an LP Congressman, I'll wait that long. Death to the Republicrats! (the parties, not the members)

 

[FrankRep]

and your point is? I don't care if I have to wait 50 years to see an LP Congressman, I'll wait that long. Death to the Republicrats! (the parties, not the members)

My point is: Don't waste my time with non-serious candidates

 

[Smart3]

My point is: Don't waste my time with non-serious candidates

Ok then. So you don't support Ron Paul then? since he never seriously had a chance at winning in 2008, and very little chance in 2012. No chance in 1988.

 

[FrankRep]

Ok then. So you don't support Ron Paul then? since he never seriously had a chance at winning in 2008, and very little chance in 2012. No chance in 1988.

Is Ron Paul a non-serious candidate in your opinion?

Ron Paul had an excellent chance of winning. Good money, running as a Republican. I think his campaign dropped the ball a few times, but Ron Paul did pull delegates to the RNC.

 

[Smart3]

Is Ron Paul a non-serious candidate in your opinion?

Ron Paul had an excellent chance of winning. Good money, running as a Republican. I think his campaign dropped the ball a few times, but Ron Paul did pull delegates to the RNC.

I don't believe after Paul lost his best-chance states (Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, Minnesota and Maine) that he had any chance at winning. The Republicans hate liberty. 90% voted AGAINST Paul. Sure 10% voted for Paul, but 10% vs 90% is not good odds.

I began to doubt Paul's candidacy the moment he didn't win in Iowa or New Hampshire. I was stunned. I felt like my money had been wasted.

I have the same feelings about the Paul campaign and the corruption of Jesse Benton as Adam Kokesh.

 

[deadfish]

I support Ehrbar.

I don't think he has a chance of winning. I have many criticisms about his campaign, he does not seem to have a winning attitude.

The democratic candidate Joyce Beatty (sp?) will most likely win. She seems terrible in every way possible.

The republican candidate, Chris Long, does not seem too bad. He said he would have voted against NDAA.

 

[erowe1]

The Libertarian Party was the first place in Ohio to back this referendum. Libertarians strongly believe in liberty and equality, and if you disagree with this referendum, then you simply are not a libertarian.

The Libertarian party may be for that. But that just proves that the Libertarians aren't libertarians, because their position has nothing at all to do with advancing liberty.

 

[FrankRep]

The Libertarian Party was the first place in Ohio to back this referendum. Libertarians strongly believe in liberty and equality, and if you disagree with this referendum, then you simply are not a libertarian.

Liberty is not Equality, Equality is not Liberty. They are mutually exclusive.

 

[Brett85]

Exactly why I don't call myself a libertarian.

 

[Smart3]

Liberty is not Equality, Equality is not Liberty. They are mutually exclusive.

This is a particularly good reason why I don't like RP's GOP support. You've only come half the way to Libertarianism.

You can not have Equality without Liberty. If all citizens are free to live their lives as they see fit, then you have true liberty.

Did you forget about "the pursuit of happiness"? - gays would like that ability as well.

Exactly why I don't call myself a libertarian.

So are you voting for Virgil Goode then?

 

[Brett85]

So are you voting for Virgil Goode then?

There's conflicting reports as to whether the Kansas Reform Party is nominating Virgil Goode or Chuck Baldwin. I'll most likely end up voting for either Baldwin or Goode, whichever one of them they end up nominating. The Kansas Reform Party is basically the same as the national Constitution Party.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I agree with the 2nd comment, he should just run as a demoncrat. He obviously is NOT a libertarian.

 

[deadfish]

Why would you two make such outrageous statements?

You two must live in bizarre districts if the democrat candidates support any of the typical libertarian ideals of limited government: drastically cutting spending, non-interventionist foreign policy (& immediate withdrawal of troops), marijuana/drug legalization, sound money/ending the fed, repealing NDAA/Patriot Act, and on and on.

Are the comments just mean-spirited? Because it's 100% stupid to suggest that a democrat party would ever consider supporting such a candidate. Get your head out of your ass.

Did you mean to say that you do not think marriage equality issues belong on a libertarian platform? Because that's a debate we can have. The income tax should not exist. Special tax benefits for married couples should not exit. Yet the do. While they do, many limited-gov't types will support giving those bullshit tax benefits to gay couples based on the issue of equality. I understand that many on RPF do not support that issue. But is it really that big of an issue to insult a young college student getting involved in politics and sticking his neck out there in the name of liberty?

So you disagree with the dude on 1 tiny, inconsequential issue? Big fucking deal. What about the other 99.999999% of the issues you agree on?

Richard Ehrbar should just run as a Democrat.

I agree with the 2nd comment, he should just run as a demoncrat. He obviously is NOT a libertarian.

 

[Smart3]

There's conflicting reports as to whether the Kansas Reform Party is nominating Virgil Goode or Chuck Baldwin. I'll most likely end up voting for either Baldwin or Goode, whichever one of them they end up nominating. The Kansas Reform Party is basically the same as the national Constitution Party.

All the state Reform parties are basically Constitution parties now.

O'hara's party, Kansas's party, the party that nominated Barnett.

If you live in Kansas, I can't expect you to believe gays are equal citizens who deserve the freedom to marry.

I like Goode, just way too many disagreements with him.