Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[fubar]

Hey.  Not that ya'all want testimonials, but I thought it might help on the marketing end:  I was turned on by the Walter Williams article.  Been snooping around for a few days.  Very exciting.  Talked to hubby and got his general agreement (that I'm not wasting my time...).  

Just saying hi and letting you know I'll be posting here and there, trying to get answers to questions and clarity of mind (ya, like that'll ever happen).  

We're gun totin' life lovin' people.  out of place in a PC world.  No dopin', been there done that (light yourselves up though if you're willing to accept what falls.).  

A Patriot at heart, so I get kinda edgy with some of the secession stuff, but...oh well...  

So, see ya around and thanks for the dream.

[Steve]

A Patriot at heart, so I get kinda edgy with some of the secession stuff, but...oh well...

No worries--we are not a secessionist movement.  That ability to secede (e.g. by selecting a border state) should be left open as a negotiating tool, but it is not a goal in and of itself.

gun totin' ...  No dopin'...(light yourselves up though if you're willing to accept what falls.).

Just as we welcome dope-tokin' folks who accept you gun-totin' types!

[mikegags]

A Patriot at heart, so I get kinda edgy with some of the secession stuff, but...oh well...  

I'm confused. Being a patriot has absolutely nothing to do with being a part the US of A. The first patriots were here *before* we had a US of A. As a matter of fact, if those patriots didn't secede from the UK we wouldn't even have a US of A!!!

I can only assume you are a 'patriot' as defined by our govt education system, the same ones we now see on bumper stickers, but only since 9/11.

As for me, I can be honest and say that I'm not even sure I'm a true patriot, as I have yet to decide if I am willing to sacrifice everything for that which I believe I in.

Please don't confuse patriotism with conformism.

[Joey]

By the way, I'm new to this thing too. My newspaper runs Walter Williams' column each week, but we're a week behind - we'll most likely have the article in this week, but anyway, after reading some of the posts on this forum and the information on the website, I must say ...


This is by far one of the best ideas I've ever heard or have come across.

I'm a soon-to-be college freshman (in suburban Dallas) and already I have run for school board (non-partisan in this state) and I am the county chair for the Libertarian Party in my county (I started it up in Feb.)

Who's to say 20,000 folks moving to, oh, New Hampshire can't elect three or four Libertarians to the state legislature.

Steve Vallaincourt is from Manchester, N.H., and he's a Libertarian/independent in the state government there.

New Hampshire has less than 2 million people; the biggest city, Manchester, is 100,000 strong ...if 20,000 liberty-loving individuals were to move in that area, who knows what could happen.

Are there any other New Hampshire fans out there? I really do believe God has called me to become a newspaper reporter (I already am) and since hitting the FSP website, I believe He's calling me in the next few years to New Hampshire.

Just think though - every once in awhile I'll come across a Libertarian, but heck, to have 20,000 of them (or like-minded) in one geographic area would be awesome.


I definitely want to push this stuff to the younger audiences (via my website).

http://www.joeydauben.com

[fubar]

I can only assume you are a 'patriot' as defined by our govt education system, the same ones we now see on bumper stickers, but only since 9/11.

Well Mikegags,  you know what happens when you assume...

I am a 'patriot' as defined by myself.  What that means is most definitely a willingness to sacrifice life, limb, and/or happiness toward the preservation of these United States.  If you don't like the pipe and drums playing in the background, just close your ears.

if those patriots didn't secede from the UK we wouldn't even have a US of A!!!

Umm... not to get side tracked in minutia....but I'm pretty sure the UK (being the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland) didn't exist until the 1800's........

Anyhoot, thanks for your concern regarding my potential confusion.

[mikegags]

I can only assume you are a 'patriot' as defined by our govt education system, the same ones we now see on bumper stickers, but only since 9/11.

Well Mikegags,  you know what happens when you assume...

I am a 'patriot' as defined by myself.  What that means is most definitely a willingness to sacrifice life, limb, and/or happiness toward the preservation of these United States.  If you don't like the pipe and drums playing in the background, just close your ears.

if those patriots didn't secede from the UK we wouldn't even have a US of A!!!

Umm... not to get side tracked in minutia....but I'm pretty sure the UK (being the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland) didn't exist until the 1800's........

Anyhoot, thanks for your concern regarding my potential confusion.

Guess I hit a nerve (and for the minutia you are correct, its easier to type UK though).

All I'm trying to say is patriotism is more than just being loyal to one's country of residence or citizenship. Of course any citizen should want to protect and preserve their homeland from foreign invaders (etc). That's not patriotism, its loyalty. Still a good thing, but not the kind of person I want to try to establish a free state with (once its established come on in). I'm *not* saying that's what you are - I'm trying to find out.

IMNSHO, patriots are willing to sacrifice anything to protect their homes (etc) from the inevitable corruption and abuse of power that is characteristic of all govts throughout history. The F.F. even built this fail-safe mechanism into the Constitution, yet the preceding generations failed to act.

This is an extremely sore spot for me, especially since 9/11. Patriotism isn't putting a flag on the antenna of one's car. Patriotism is the willingness to burn that flag in an act of defiance against a power-hungry or tyrannical govt. The Fourth branch of govt if you will.

In the Civil War I would classify the Confederacy as the patriots and the North as merely a bunch of loyalists. A northern patriot would have said "Uh, Abe - I'm not going to fight - technically these guys have the right to secede. Something is really wrong. We need to look at the problem and not just put guns to their heads until they conform."

[Scoobie Snaxx]

high everyone!!!  i've been reading about this group and it seems like something i want to be part of.  a little about myself, i'm a graduate student in upstate ny -- i don't want to be too specific, never know who is listening   .  i guess i am a desciple of noam chomsky and peter singer.
i simply groove on the idea of making our own little country, where common sense prevails.  
i still haven't found a true point by point platform for you guys.  could someone just answer my queries.
1)  obviously i am for legalization, i've worked with some medhemp folks and have travelled to amsterdam a couple of times.  how far do you want to go; are we talking natural substances or the whole enchilada.  i cannot not see why not make H legal.  it's my body!
2) i hope your state protects a woman's right to choose, anytime.  hopefully you have read dr singer's work on this topic.
3) continuing the dr. singer tact, i also hope euthanasia is allowed.  the old and infirm are nothing more than leeches on our hard working society.  i really think a modified "logan's run" would benefit all
4) i also hope that your country will have no christian references, i mean NONE!  i have meet michael newdow, he's a great man.  we will need new money, in god we trust is offensive to the majority of the world.  i think organized religion leads to nothing but misery; look at all the problems in the world.  as an atheist, i don't want the radical right to tell me how to live, who to sleep with, what to injest, and so on.
5) i am also concered about the greedy corporate culture.  how would your country address that?  would free enterprise be allowed, or maybe just cottage industries.  i want clean air and clean water, i hope your crack down on polluters.  
6) one reason i want to leave amerika is that stupid second amendment.  our society is violent, repressive, racist, and unfair.  might does not make right.  guns empower those to bully around those who do not have guns.
7) would this country have an army??? i hope not.  american foreign policy has been strong armed and imperical.  i am ashamed of our military and especially the rich, silver spoon, boys who run it.
i have mentioned your site to friends of mine who practice alternative lifestyles.  i think they'd be interested if you are tolerent and accepting of them.  

well i think this is a good start.  hope to hear from someone  

scoobie

[Reaper]

1)  obviously i am for legalization, i've worked with some medhemp folks and have travelled to amsterdam a couple of times.  how far do you want to go; are we talking natural substances or the whole enchilada.  i cannot not see why not make H legal.  it's my body!

The vast majority of those in the FSP support a complete end to the drug war.

2) i hope your state protects a woman's right to choose, anytime.  hopefully you have read dr singer's work on this topic.

This is a matter about which reasonable people can disagree.  I may be mistaken but I do not believe the FSP takes a position on this one way or the other.  I'm unfamiliar with Dr. Singer's work.  However, if he's anything like Chomsky I'm also very unlikely to read it.

3) continuing the dr. singer tact, i also hope euthanasia is allowed.  the old and infirm are nothing more than leeches on our hard working society.  i really think a modified "logan's run" would benefit all

I would think euthanasia and suicide would be legal under many circumstances.  The old and infirm would have the same rights as everyone else.  There would be no "leeches" at all, as there would be no government welfare.

4) i also hope that your country will have no christian references, i mean NONE!  i have meet michael newdow, he's a great man.  we will need new money, in god we trust is offensive to the majority of the world.  i think organized religion leads to nothing but misery; look at all the problems in the world.  as an atheist, i don't want the radical right to tell me how to live, who to sleep with, what to injest, and so on.

Separation of church and state would be stronger in a free state because the state would not be so involved in everyday life.  No public school, very little public property, etc.

5) i am also concered about the greedy corporate culture.  how would your country address that?  would free enterprise be allowed, or maybe just cottage industries.  i want clean air and clean water, i hope your crack down on polluters.  

Capitalism would be the economic system.  People who pollute the land, water or air of others would be required to compensate them justly and cease and decist.

6) one reason i want to leave amerika is that stupid second amendment.  our society is violent, repressive, racist, and unfair.  might does not make right.  guns empower those to bully around those who do not have guns.

You would probably not be happy in a truly free state then where people are free to own and openly carry any weapon they so desire.  An armed society is a polite society.

7) would this country have an army??? i hope not.  american foreign policy has been strong armed and imperical.  i am ashamed of our military and especially the rich, silver spoon, boys who run it.

We are not rushing to leave the US.  If the federal government will obey the constitution as written we will have no need to leave the union and form our own country. However, if we did, we doubtless would have a standing army of sorts but dedicated soley to repelling invasions of our country.  It would be forbidden to get involved in the affairs of any other nation/nations that were not directly attacking us.

i have mentioned your site to friends of mine who practice alternative lifestyles.  i think they'd be interested if you are tolerent and accepting of them.  

As a rule, we are tolerant of anyone who does not initiate force or fraud against the person or property of another.

You should check out http://www.libertarian.org for information on the basic principles will institute if we are succesful.  However, you will likely find they are not compatible with Chomski's communism.

[debra]

high everyone!!!  i've been reading about this group and it seems like something i want to be part of.  a little about myself, i'm a graduate student in upstate ny -- i don't want to be too specific, never know who is listening   .  i guess i am a desciple of noam chomsky and peter singer.
i simply groove on the idea of making our own little country, where common sense prevails.  
i still haven't found a true point by point platform for you guys.  could someone just answer my queries.
1)  obviously i am for legalization, i've worked with some medhemp folks and have travelled to amsterdam a couple of times.  how far do you want to go; are we talking natural substances or the whole enchilada.  i cannot not see why not make H legal.  it's my body!

As stated earlier, many - if not most - of the FSP participants are supporters of complete decriminalization of all drugs.

2) i hope your state protects a woman's right to choose, anytime.  hopefully you have read dr singer's work on this topic.

I don't believe the FSP has an official position on this topic.

3) continuing the dr. singer tact, i also hope euthanasia is allowed.  the old and infirm are nothing more than leeches on our hard working society.  i really think a modified "logan's run" would benefit all

Presuming one is not the runner.  I'm afraid I am not a big fan of Mr. Singer. While I cannot fathom the concept of laws against suicide (who on earth would they prosecute??), I find the concept of euthanasia horrifying. Those advocating it are usually under the assumption that they would not be on the receiving end of it (Logan 5 was a firm believer...until he hit the magic age). History has shown that this is usually a false assumption.

That being said, since coerced wealth redistribution (in the form of welfare) would not be taking place, the old and infirm would not be leeching off anyone, although they may be the recipients of voluntary charity.

4) i also hope that your country will have no christian references, i mean NONE!  i have meet michael newdow, he's a great man.  we will need new money, in god we trust is offensive to the majority of the world.  i think organized religion leads to nothing but misery; look at all the problems in the world.  as an atheist, i don't want the radical right to tell me how to live, who to sleep with, what to injest, and so on.

It's a state, not a country, so the money issue is a moot point.

But you would be free to be an atheist just as Christians would be free to be Christians. Since (as noted earlier) we hope to privatize a majority of institutions, the owner of that institution would be free to choose what they promote.  There would be Christian schools, stores, etc, as well as secular schools, stores, etc (or pagan or Islamic or whatever). A free state would neither promote nor suppress any religion or lack thereof.

5) i am also concered about the greedy corporate culture.  how would your country address that?  would free enterprise be allowed, or maybe just cottage industries.  i want clean air and clean water, i hope your crack down on polluters.  

As mentioned earlier, it is a state, not a country. Free enterprise would be encouraged. Pollution would be handled on a torte basis, I imagine. If a corporation polluted the water and you got sick, you could sue them up the wazoo. If a jury thought the corporation did indeed cause you harm, you would be awarded large quantities of money, which would (a) allow you to purchase land to preserve, (b) discourage other companies from following the same practices of the first company and (c) possible bankrupt the company you sued.

6) one reason i want to leave amerika is that stupid second amendment.  our society is violent, repressive, racist, and unfair.  might does not make right.  guns empower those to bully around those who do not have guns.

The FSP is likely not what you are looking for, then. Most - if not all - of its members realize that even if you were to ban all guns, that would mean that the weaker members of society would be at the mercy of the strong. A strong man, or gang of men, can easily rape, torture, and kill a woman with their bare hands. A woman's only hope for defense would be a gun, which has been proven to increase her chances of not being harmed by 250% over the next "best" method: lying there and not fighting back.  Often, bullies are dissuaded only by a stronger force.  

7) would this country have an army??? i hope not.  american foreign policy has been strong armed and imperical.  i am ashamed of our military and especially the rich, silver spoon, boys who run it.

Since it's not a country, no. However, one would hope that we would have better control over our National Guard, allowing it to be a unit of the state rather than an extension of the federal military. In addition, we would have the unorganized militia...that is, ordinary citizens capable of bearing arms.

i have mentioned your site to friends of mine who practice alternative lifestyles.  i think they'd be interested if you are tolerent and accepting of them.  

That's wonderful, and we welcome them. Just be sure you realize that tolerance swings both ways. Just as we would happily tolerate (for instance) an acid-dropping atheist polygamist living next to us, he would need to tolerate a gun-toting fundamentalist Christian living next door to him.

(Note that "tolerate" means just that - neither has to invite the other over for BBQs!  )

well i think this is a good start.  hope to hear from someone  

scoobie

Hope this helps!

[Reaper]

I find the concept of euthanasia horrifying. Those advocating it are usually under the assumption that they would not be on the receiving end of it (Logan 5 was a firm believer...until he hit the magic age). History has shown that this is usually a false assumption.

I think under certain circumstances euthanasia is a respectable option.  However, that said, a person who wishes to be euthanized under specific circumstances should make necessary legal arrangements in advance such as a "living will".  I for one would not wish to be kept alive by machines indefinitely with no hope of recovery, or the hope of a "recovery" as basically a drooling vegetable.

[debra]

I think under certain circumstances euthanasia is a respectable option.  However, that said, a person who wishes to be euthanized under specific circumstances should make necessary legal arrangements in advance such as a "living will".  I for one would not wish to be kept alive by machines indefinitely with no hope of recovery, or the hope of a "recovery" as basically a drooling vegetable.

I see what you're saying. In Scoobie's context, it appeared that he was advocating killing off anyone who was above a certain age or with some (undefined) handicap should just be popped off willy-nilly, without their consent. I guess I consider the living-will thing more as "delegated suicide" than euthanasia (which I've always understood as being the "mercy" killing of those who "needed it" ... as defined by some third party).

[Reaper]

Yeah, I guess you could call it "assisted suicide" as opposed to euthanasia.

[mikegags]

That's wonderful, and we welcome them. Just be sure you realize that tolerance swings both ways. Just as we would happily tolerate (for instance) an acid-dropping atheist polygamist living next to us, he would need to tolerate a gun-toting fundamentalist Christian living next door to him.

(Note that "tolerate" means just that - neither has to invite the other over for BBQs!  )

Hi Debra. First I'll begin by stating I thoroughly enjoy many of your posts, and I'm going to start using your "gun test" on a regular basis in discussions with my conservative friends and co-workers. Its makes an excellent point very clear - something I've been unable to do with facts and other metaphors.

I have a question for you, as I am an FSP newbie since last week.

Everyone seems concerned with their alternate lifestyles, drug use, religious and personal values, etc. I assume that carries over to the usual concerns about races and ethnicity.

It is my understanding, and feel free to educate me, that in a truly free society individuals are free to discriminate based on whatever criteria they wish. I am not saying I approve of this!. I would never want to belong to all-white/all-men's golf club. I would have a problem working for a company that announced it would fire any women who got pregnant. As soon as I found another job I'd quit and make a stink. I would think others would do the same.

I guess I believe that people have the right to be prejudiced, racist, biased, homophobic, ignorant (etc) and in general hate who ever they want. They are not free to violate the rights (life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness) of others. I don't believe a job is a right. Its an oppurtunity. If a company won't hire you because you are Asian, then go out and start your own company.

People should be free to hire who they want, and I guess that means they can fire who they want to. Or form clubs with who they want. etc. It goes both ways though: all-black golf clubs, companies that won't hire anybody white over 50. Discrimination is not some evil word. Some people have discriminating tastes for food. Others discriminate when it comes to choosing who they will work and play with. It is my belief that the discriminator is really the one who is losing in the long run. He is denying himself the potential of a better employee, and its likely that others who aren't discriminated against will leave the company or group on their own in protest (or never consider them in the first place). As citizens we have the right to boycott and protest that company.

That being said, I would state that I wouldn't be very comfortable having an openly gay couple living next door. I find homosexuality unnatural and would be afraid of the exposure to it on my children. Would I insult and attack? Of course not. I might move. That is my right. I see nothing wrong with communities formed around common beliefs, ideaologies, religions, ethnicity, race, lifestyle, etc.

What I do not want to see, nor do I want anyone to expect, is that these individual items will be protected in the free state (other than a govt org of course).

Others have a right to an alternative lifestyle; I have a right to not want an openly gay teacher educating my kids in my local community school.

Could I, or any of us for that matter, put a gun to someone's head, and be willing to pull the trigger, if that person didn't want to hire a highly qualified Latino because he was Latino, or gay, or had AIDS?

I'd like to slap him around a little, but no, I couldn't pull the trigger.

[debra]

Hi Mike, and welcome to the circus!  

Glad you liked the test - it's a useful tool that also helps me clarify things in my own mind when I can't decide about an issue.

Regarding the discrimination issue, I can only speak for myself (don't I always?? ) :

- Would (or rather, *should*) private organizations be free to discriminate on things like race, gender, and religion? Yes.
- Would I belong to an organization that did so? Hell no. I'd also encourage boycotting and other non-violent methods of dissuasion.

I think freedom of association is not used nearly enough. While I loathe Jesse Jackson, the man is certainly a master of it. Just *hints* of a boycott have caused companies to bow to blackmail-like demands.  

(I don't consider it actual blackmail because he's not using force, just freedom of association. Obviously the companies consider his influence over the market to be more valuable than whatever they give up in exchange. Of course, he'd probably be a lot less successful if he couldn't threaten discrimination lawsuits at the drop of a hat.)

[fubar]

any citizen should want to protect and preserve their homeland from foreign invaders (etc). That's not patriotism, its loyalty

Loyalty born of what?  A desire to preserve baseball as we know it?  No, I think the loyalty comes from a sense of patriotism.  I am a patriot of the USA that exists today.  Therefore, I am loyal to, and willing to make those mentioned sacrifices in order to preserve, the USA today.  

IMNSHO, patriots are willing to sacrifice anything to protect their homes (etc) from the inevitable corruption and abuse of power that is characteristic of all govts throughout history.

It is not the 'inevitable' corruption and abuse of power that usually engenders that protection reaction.  It is the actual practice of corruption and abuse of power that engenders reactionary movements.  The question, for each individual, is what degree of this abuse are you willing to put-up with before becoming a patriot of a NEW way.

The FF's did not automatically become 'Patriots' of a new way.  They petitioned the King for redress on multiple occasions, were rejected, and then oppressed to an even greater degree.  

Patriotism isn't putting a flag on the antenna of one's car. Patriotism is the willingness to burn that flag in an act of defiance against a power-hungry or tyrannical govt

As I've never done either?..?...  Is there some other test of my patriotism you would like to explore?

I used to think this confusion in word usage and definition was a recent phenomenon.  Then I read the intro to Ben Franklins 'Thirteen Virtues'....same story, different century.

Mikegag, instead of getting stuck on word usage, it might help if I just said the following...I have no illusions regarding the sainthood of the USA yesterday or today.  I would like to see a better USA, and I am willing to work towards that goal, even make some sacrifices for it.  But please understand, my initial goal is to improve that country which I am a patriot to, not destroy it.