I'm going to summarize all of my thoughts on this very important matter in this thread, because I need to touch upon everything that so blatantly makes the Constitution Party anti-liberty.
First, I need to make the immediate claim that The Revolution's affinity for this political party frightens me to no end. This movement, in the course of a couple of months, has gone from a large tent of liberty lovers to a small whack-job tent of Theocrats and religious nuts. I would dearly hope that most here do not believe that the "Constitution" Party is the only hope we have left. In fact, I would rather posit that they are a great danger to our cause, rather than the "God" send that many people here believe it is.
Let us take a look at the party platform...
They have this to say about gambling:
This should immediately strike any freedom-loving libertarian as a very frightening thing. Why can the Constitution Party not simply say they do not favor federally-regulated gambling with tax payers' money? Why does it have anything to do with morals? Who are they to throw around words like "family values" and "moral fiber"? That should never have ANYTHING to do with the way the federal government is managed!
They have this to say about pornography (dear heavens):
WHAT?! I am simply astounded that few people here seem to find how disgracefully socialistic this all sounds! A distortion of God's will? Who are they to decide such an asinine thing? And how dare they use the First Amendment to erode our freedom of speech, when the First Amendment CLEARLY DEFINES our RIGHT to freedom of speech? This is a dastardly attempt to promote religious charlatanry, all the while implementing our Constitution in the most insulting of ways.
They say this about education:
Yes, any libertarian would agree that the federal government should have nothing to do with education. Surely almost everybody here is for the closing of the Department of Education. But look at the reasons they provide: education "cannot be separated from religious faith." The Constitution Party clearly uses religious principle to justify political principle, but any freedom lover knows that it should be the OTHER WAY AROUND! This kind of bible pounding is precisely how we lost so many of our freedoms in the 20th century.
They say this of "family":
Umm... what? Have they heard of the 10th amendment? States have the right to define marriage if they damn well please! The federal government cannot institute a constitutional amendment defining marriage, but that's because of the 10th amendment. What the hell does "God" have anything to do with it? Marriage is only a religious ceremony for those who make it that way. To think that they believe the federal government has some sort of obligation to follow what "God has instituted" just demonstrates this party's complete and utter lack of regard for Constitutional liberty and state's rights. Do they not realize that any state that wishes to allow marriages for gay couples is simply exercising their 10th amendment rights? Any freedom lover would understand this, but, once again, the Constitution Party believes they should put their ridiculous religious nonsense in front of the much more important principles: liberty, freedom, and the Constitution.
This is just clear bigotry. They mention nothing of opposing efforts to legalize any adoption regulation of any sort, which is what a libertarian SHOULD do. Because these idiots are so strongly drawn to their religious bigotry, they only appear to oppose regulation when it comes to homosexuals. Any freedom lover would oppose regulation of ANY KIND because it's not a role of government authorized by the Constitution! Again, a clear indication that this party is a Theocratic party, and not one supporting our Constitution.
I do not have an ounce of regret in my entire body when I say that the Constitution Party could not have chosen a more ironic name for their pathetic, zealous, whack job organization. Their POTUS '08 candidate, Chuck Baldwin, a bigoted dirt bag who also happens to be a "man of God", closely follows the party platform. Do we really want even the slightest possibility of this maniac having executive control of the federal government?
It necessarily brings up a very important question: why did all of you Baldwin supporters ever support Ron Paul in the first place? Ron Paul is a religious man, but his views on freedom and liberty have absolutely nothing to do with his born-again status. He recognizes that freedom should be for all, and that the Constitution - NOT THE BIBLE - should defend this fact. I've said it before, and I'll say it again; if you follow the crazy rhetoric that the "Constitution" Party preaches, then you supported Ron Paul for all the wrong reasons. He wasn't some sort of religious upholder, nor was he an "issues" voter. He votes on PRINCIPLE - he votes on whether or not the issue at hand is authorized by the Constitution. The Constitution Party has clearly made its decisions based off of a much different - much irrelevant - document that should hold no bearing in any political decisions. Was it not the First Amendment that declared Congress shall make no law, neither defending nor prohibiting, a religious organization? (Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof).
With Ron Paul out of the race, I understand that The Revolutionaries don't have many choices. But why must we stoop to the embarrassingly contradictory nature of Chuck Baldwin and his Theocratic nut job party platform? I have too much trouble believing that everything the Revolutionaries worked for ended up in vain. And if you believe that their work is not in vain with Chuck Baldwin being the top contender at the moment for the liberty vote, then you are part of the problem, and not part of the solution.
First, I need to make the immediate claim that The Revolution's affinity for this political party frightens me to no end. This movement, in the course of a couple of months, has gone from a large tent of liberty lovers to a small whack-job tent of Theocrats and religious nuts. I would dearly hope that most here do not believe that the "Constitution" Party is the only hope we have left. In fact, I would rather posit that they are a great danger to our cause, rather than the "God" send that many people here believe it is.
Let us take a look at the party platform...
They have this to say about gambling:
This should immediately strike any freedom-loving libertarian as a very frightening thing. Why can the Constitution Party not simply say they do not favor federally-regulated gambling with tax payers' money? Why does it have anything to do with morals? Who are they to throw around words like "family values" and "moral fiber"? That should never have ANYTHING to do with the way the federal government is managed!
They have this to say about pornography (dear heavens):
WHAT?! I am simply astounded that few people here seem to find how disgracefully socialistic this all sounds! A distortion of God's will? Who are they to decide such an asinine thing? And how dare they use the First Amendment to erode our freedom of speech, when the First Amendment CLEARLY DEFINES our RIGHT to freedom of speech? This is a dastardly attempt to promote religious charlatanry, all the while implementing our Constitution in the most insulting of ways.
They say this about education:
Yes, any libertarian would agree that the federal government should have nothing to do with education. Surely almost everybody here is for the closing of the Department of Education. But look at the reasons they provide: education "cannot be separated from religious faith." The Constitution Party clearly uses religious principle to justify political principle, but any freedom lover knows that it should be the OTHER WAY AROUND! This kind of bible pounding is precisely how we lost so many of our freedoms in the 20th century.
They say this of "family":
Umm... what? Have they heard of the 10th amendment? States have the right to define marriage if they damn well please! The federal government cannot institute a constitutional amendment defining marriage, but that's because of the 10th amendment. What the hell does "God" have anything to do with it? Marriage is only a religious ceremony for those who make it that way. To think that they believe the federal government has some sort of obligation to follow what "God has instituted" just demonstrates this party's complete and utter lack of regard for Constitutional liberty and state's rights. Do they not realize that any state that wishes to allow marriages for gay couples is simply exercising their 10th amendment rights? Any freedom lover would understand this, but, once again, the Constitution Party believes they should put their ridiculous religious nonsense in front of the much more important principles: liberty, freedom, and the Constitution.
This is just clear bigotry. They mention nothing of opposing efforts to legalize any adoption regulation of any sort, which is what a libertarian SHOULD do. Because these idiots are so strongly drawn to their religious bigotry, they only appear to oppose regulation when it comes to homosexuals. Any freedom lover would oppose regulation of ANY KIND because it's not a role of government authorized by the Constitution! Again, a clear indication that this party is a Theocratic party, and not one supporting our Constitution.
I do not have an ounce of regret in my entire body when I say that the Constitution Party could not have chosen a more ironic name for their pathetic, zealous, whack job organization. Their POTUS '08 candidate, Chuck Baldwin, a bigoted dirt bag who also happens to be a "man of God", closely follows the party platform. Do we really want even the slightest possibility of this maniac having executive control of the federal government?
It necessarily brings up a very important question: why did all of you Baldwin supporters ever support Ron Paul in the first place? Ron Paul is a religious man, but his views on freedom and liberty have absolutely nothing to do with his born-again status. He recognizes that freedom should be for all, and that the Constitution - NOT THE BIBLE - should defend this fact. I've said it before, and I'll say it again; if you follow the crazy rhetoric that the "Constitution" Party preaches, then you supported Ron Paul for all the wrong reasons. He wasn't some sort of religious upholder, nor was he an "issues" voter. He votes on PRINCIPLE - he votes on whether or not the issue at hand is authorized by the Constitution. The Constitution Party has clearly made its decisions based off of a much different - much irrelevant - document that should hold no bearing in any political decisions. Was it not the First Amendment that declared Congress shall make no law, neither defending nor prohibiting, a religious organization? (Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof).
With Ron Paul out of the race, I understand that The Revolutionaries don't have many choices. But why must we stoop to the embarrassingly contradictory nature of Chuck Baldwin and his Theocratic nut job party platform? I have too much trouble believing that everything the Revolutionaries worked for ended up in vain. And if you believe that their work is not in vain with Chuck Baldwin being the top contender at the moment for the liberty vote, then you are part of the problem, and not part of the solution.
