Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 4

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
The late homosexual pioneer/icon Frank Kameny did (need to be told that having sex with animals is wrong).

Predictable bunny trail. Point was made.

Besides embracing bestiality, one of the modern day pioneers/icons of the LGBTQ movement (Frank Kameny) also spoke to NAMBLA.

Frank Kameny Responds to AFTAH Report that He Spoke at NAMBLA Event in 1981
https://americansfortruth.com/2007/...report-that-he-spoke-at-nambla-event-in-1981/

See what happens when people are allowed to write their own moral code Art? (amongst other things, children and animals get hurt).

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
The theocratic religion of Islam and it's barbarian Sharia law is reality.

You mean the one that executes homosexuals? Well aware of how fanatical religious zealots operate and that's why it's a good thing the West is free of such theocratic rule.

Their false prophet married a 6 year old and consummated the marriage when she was the ripe old age of 9.

Yet another thing the LGBTQ movement and Islam have in common: pedophilia.

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Peter Tatchell, Ed Murray, and practically every leader of the LGBTQueer movement has been a pedophile, a pederast or promoted sex with children, i.e. their "belief system" was that adult-child sex is perfectly normal. That's just one ugly part of the nasty can of worms that you shouldn't open.

Laws in regards to child molesting are in black and white and enforced along with any manner of abuse...

Actually no. HRC founder and accused pederast Terry Bean got off on all criminal charges against the teenage boy that he was accused of raping because the accuser was allowed to make a monetary settlement with Bean.

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Unless it's the LGBTQueer movement punishing people based on their Christian faith (i.e. Jack Phillips' up coming SCOTUS case).

No Art, we can't all just get along.

And more of the same...

The same ole LGBTQueer 'gaystapo' intolerance that has been one of the central themes of this 4 part thread.

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
First of all, there is only one kind of Christianity, i.e. being a follower of Christ and His Word.

In that case, lying, spreading sleazy rumours and innuendo must inform part of it as well then. Noted.

Speculating that someone who partakes in recreational drug use, pornography or homosexuality very well might partake in those behaviors is far from "lying" Art.


Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Second: This 4 part thread has shown that homosexual behavior, the culture and agenda that go with it are far from "civilized". If you need to review the evidence from the index on page 1, I'll gladly review it with you.

Well, no. It's just shown that the author is a deranged nutcase who's likely in the closet himself.

Sleazy innuendo once again noted.

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Children being exposed to sexual perversion at 'gay' pride parades while pro LGBTQ city officials sit blindly watching it happen. The indoctrination of children, even though CDOM (contributing to the delinquency of a minor) laws prohibit it. Taking away parental rights so that children as young as 15 can have abortions and genital mutilation surgery to pretend they are of a different gender than they were born as, etc. etc. etc. You've heard it all before, but you conveniently pretend to forget it as fast as I post it.

Oh, I remember your usual and as per usual you conveniently forget all those debunked photoshopped pictures and misinformation over the years...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuvAGJV5E-w

What was the phrase that the pedophiles and pederasts at the homosexual founded organization named NAMBLA would say?

"Rape em at 8 or you're too late"?

On that note:

Moving on...

 

[Arthur Brain]

Besides embracing bestiality, one of the modern day pioneers/icons of the LGBTQ movement (Frank Kameny) also spoke to NAMBLA.

Frank Kameny Responds to AFTAH Report that He Spoke at NAMBLA Event in 1981
https://americansfortruth.com/2007/...report-that-he-spoke-at-nambla-event-in-1981/

See what happens when people are allowed to write their own moral code Art? (amongst other things, children and animals get hurt).

As per usual, it's just the same tired stuff. Laws are in place in regards to protecting children and animals from abuse and much more stringent as well.

Their false prophet married a 6 year old and consummated the marriage when she was the ripe old age of 9.

Yet Islamic zealots murder homosexuals under the guise of religion. This particular bunny trail of yours has been addressed all ends up as it is.

Yet another thing the LGBTQ movement and Islam have in common: pedophilia.

As above. Been addressed soooooo many times over what, six years now?

Actually no. HRC founder and accused pederast Terry Bean got off on all criminal charges against the teenage boy that he was accused of raping because the accuser was allowed to make a monetary settlement with Bean.

Still nothing to do with the subject...

Speculating that someone who partakes in recreational drug use, pornography or homosexuality very well might partake in those behaviors is far from "lying" Art.

Course it is. You've been caught out on it and spread the same lies time and again, gotten banned for it time and again. You've still to apologize for all of it too.

Lying innuendo once again noted.

Straight folk don't invent lurid innuendo and facile crap about posters being gay. There's more than enough justification to speculate that yours are born out of projection.

On that note:

Moving on...

Yeah, you're for a theocratic state based on your own religious "ideals", not a free society.

Own it.

Have fun 'moving on' as it's about time one of your ardent fans did some legwork for a change. Where are they?

:liberals:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

Besides embracing bestiality, one of the modern day pioneers/icons of the LGBTQ movement (Frank Kameny) also spoke to NAMBLA.

Frank Kameny Responds to AFTAH Report that He Spoke at NAMBLA Event in 1981
https://americansfortruth.com/2007/...report-that-he-spoke-at-nambla-event-in-1981/

See what happens when people are allowed to write their own moral code Art? (amongst other things, children and animals get hurt).

As per usual, it's just the same tired stuff. Laws are in place in regards to protecting children and animals from abuse and much more stringent as well.

Yeah, we saw those "stringent" laws in action when the 8 year old boy was erotically dancing in front of the pedophiles of the LGBTQ movement at a NYC pride parade.

I'd continue this conversation with another Uncle Art scenario, but it's already been established that good ole Uncle Art shouldn't be allowed to answer questions that children ask him.

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ized!-Part-4&p=5080720&viewfull=1#post5080720

 

[Arthur Brain]

Yeah, we saw those "stringent" laws in action when the 8 year old boy was erotically dancing in front of the pedophiles of the LGBTQ movement at a NYC pride parade.

I'd close this conversation with an Uncle Art scenario, but it's already been established that good ole Uncle Art shouldn't be allowed to answer questions that children ask him.

Sounds like "Auntie Connie" needs to get some sleep and a reality check. Thanks for sparing the usual, demented scenarios at any rate...

After that 'Air Force One' debacle it's just as well.

Hey, I'll invent one for you!

"Auntie Connie, why is it that you spend so much time obsessing over homosexual men? Isn't that incredibly odd behaviour for a supposedly heterosexual, married man? My friend says your 'wife' is a keyboard mouse..."

:liberals:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior Vi
Yeah, we saw those "stringent" laws in action when the 8 year old boy was erotically dancing in front of the pedophiles of the LGBTQ movement at a NYC pride parade.

I'd close this conversation with an Uncle Art scenario, but it's already been established that good ole Uncle Art shouldn't be allowed to answer questions that children ask him.

Sounds like "Auntie Connie" needs to get some sleep and a reality check. Thanks for sparing the usual, demented scenarios at any rate...

After that 'Air Force One' debacle it's just as well.

Hey, I'll invent one for you!

"Auntie Connie, why is it that you spend so much time obsessing over homosexual men? Isn't that incredibly odd behaviour for a supposedly heterosexual, married man? My friend says your 'wife' is a keyboard mouse..."

:liberals:

That millstone around your neck must be getting pretty heavy by now Art.

Matthew 18:6

On a related note: If anyone else feels the urgent need to delouse after reading posts by Art Brain, private message me and we can discuss sharing the cost of a 50 gallon drum of delousing powder.

http://www.wholesalesuppliesplus.com/images/Products/openheadsteeldrum.jpg

Next up: Exposing Libertarianism (again) and an updated table of contents.

 

[Arthur Brain]

That millstone around your neck must be getting pretty heavy by now Art.

Matthew 18:6

On a related note: If anyone else feels the urgent need to delouse after reading posts by Art Brain, private message me and we can discuss sharing the cost of a 50 gallon drum of delousing powder.

http://www.wholesalesuppliesplus.com/images/Products/openheadsteeldrum.jpg

Eh? None of your 'ardent fans' even bother to show up on this blog of yours so fat chance of em' wanting private correspondence ya crank.

Next up: Exposing Libertarianism (again) and an updated table of contents.

Oh, it's always a thrill when there's an updated table of contents!

:cloud9:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Eh? None of your 'ardent fans' even bother to show up on this blog of yours so fat chance of em' wanting private correspondence ya crank.

I'm pretty certain if any of the 200-300 people that follow this thread on a daily basis thought that I needed help in dealing with morally confused (to put it lightly) bloke from the UK, they would have stepped forward already.

Oh, it's always a thrill when there's an updated table of contents!

:cloud9:

I see the table of contents as a quick reference reminder to others what kind of moral depravity people who stand for decency are up against.

Again, thanks for participating in the thread.

 

[Arthur Brain]

I'm pretty certain if any of the 200-300 people that follow this thread on a daily basis thought that I needed help in dealing with morally confused (to put it lightly) bloke from the UK, they would have stepped forward already.

Oh, you honestly seem to think that you have an ardent following of 200-300 people don't you? Silly man. You have views just from people on here alone, then guests etc. Your view tally is really not impressive and especially if nobody bothers to join up dude. Your 'crusade' is wanting...

I see the table of contents as a quick reference reminder to others what kind of moral depravity people who stand for decency are up against.

Again, thanks for participating in the thread.

Hey, maybe there'll be a flurry of active response this time around!

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I'm pretty certain if any of the 200-300 people that follow this thread on a daily basis thought that I needed help in dealing with morally confused (to put it lightly) bloke from the UK, they would have stepped forward already.

Oh, you honestly seem to think that you have an ardent following of 200-300 people don't you? Silly man. You have views just from people on here alone, then guests etc. Your view tally is really not impressive and especially if nobody bothers to join up dude. Your 'crusade' is wanting...

I'm just going by the numbers. I've spent a fair amount of time the past few years in various forums putting in a plug for this now 4 part thread. People are starving for the truth, not a partisan political party slant on it.

Did you know that I had a Trump lemming supporter here on TOL just the other night say I can't even talk about the President?
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...d-Parenthood&p=5096206&viewfull=1#post5096206

As long as these good people at TOL (i.e. the owner and his moderators) allow me to share the truth, I'll continue sharing it. If not, I'll...

move on.

 

[Arthur Brain]

I'm just going by the numbers. I've spent a fair amount of time the past few years in various forums putting in a plug for this now 4 part thread. People are starving for the truth, not a partisan political party slant on it.

Did you know that I had a Trump lemming supporter here on TOL just the other night say I can't even talk about the President?
http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...d-Parenthood&p=5096206&viewfull=1#post5096206

As long as these good people at TOL (i.e. the owner and his moderators) allow me to share the truth, I'll continue sharing it. If not, I'll...

move on.

Oh, I'm sure you have but what you're providing ain't 'truth'. It's just a one man band of obsessive bunk, pompous, tedious waffle and crackpot propaganda.

Do carry on...

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
... People are starving for the truth, not a partisan political party slant on it.

Oh, I'm sure you have but what you're providing ain't 'truth'. It's just a one man band of obsessive bunk, pompous, tedious waffle and crackpot propaganda.

Do carry on...

If you can show that homosex isn't a disease ridden fast track to an early death, or that the LGBTQ movement isn't a child molesting/indoctrinating/parental rights bashing movement, or that invaluable institutions that are being destroyed by the LGBTQ movement aren't needed that much by society, or that the 'gaystapo-jack booted thugs' suppression of religious freedom really isn't happening, then please do. If not, I will continue to...

"carry on".

 

[aCultureWarrior]

It's time again to expose the God-hating/secular humanist Libertarian movement, a movement that pretends to be conservative (they're varmints disguised as chickens inside the hen house).

What values they are "conserving" is a question that none of them seem to want to answer.

Some of modern day leaders of the Libertarian movement are atheist Walter Block (who justified a father selling his 4 year old son..."who is not an adult"...to a member of the North American Man Boy Love Association).

Others are Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell (aka Loony Rockwell) Laurence M. Vance and of course the late icon of the Libertarian movement, Murray Rothbard, who in an article justified parents murdering their disabled child.

And people wonder why I expose and mock these filthy barbarians.

Since I've been talking about the suppression of religious freedom by the jack-booted thug 'gaystapo' and the upcoming SCOTUS hearing involving Christian/baker Jack Phillips, I thought I'd share the Libertarian sick and twisted slant on it (the case of Richland WA florist Barronelle Stutzman is used in the following article).

The Right to Discriminate Is a Basic Property Right

by Laurence M. Vance

3/24/17

...The Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) attorneys who represented Stutzman argued: “It’s wrong for the state to force any citizen to support a particular view about marriage or anything else against their will. Freedom of speech and religion aren’t subject to the whim of a majority; they are constitutional guarantees.”
Washington’s attorney general, Bob Ferguson, said that “Arlene’s Flowers in Richland doesn’t have to sell wedding flowers at all.” However, “if they choose to sell wedding flowers, they cannot choose to sell wedding flowers only for heterosexual couples and deny that same service to gay couples.”

Let’s clear up these and other misconceptions about discrimination from the libertarian perspectives of property rights, the non-aggression principle, and individual liberty.
Designing, making, selling, or not selling floral arrangements has nothing to do with free speech or speech. The U.S. Supreme Court has greatly erred by labeling certain actions as a form of speech in order to protect them instead of just recognizing property rights.
Refusing to sell a product has everything to do with property rights. Since no potential customer has a claim on the property of any business owner, he has no legal recourse if the owner of the property refuses to sell it to him.
Selling someone a product has nothing to do with endorsing the buyer’s opinions or use of the product.
Discrimination is a crime in search of a victim. Every real crime needs a tangible victim with measurable damages. Discrimination is not aggression, force, or threat. It should never be a crime.
To outlaw discrimination is to outlaw freedom of thought.
Public accommodations are still private businesses. Just because they serve the public by offering to sell them goods and/or services doesn’t mean that they should be regarded as public libraries, public parks, and public buildings that have to accept all members of the public.
If discrimination is wrong, immoral, unjust, hateful, and bigoted, then it doesn’t suddenly cease to be these things because the entity doing the discriminating is religious in nature or the person doing the discriminating is doing it for religious reasons.
There is no “right to service.” In a free society, business owners have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason on any basis.
If a florist can choose not to sell a particular type of flower arrangement, then why can’t it choose not to sell a flower arrangement to a particular person? If the government is so interested in stamping out discrimination, they why doesn’t it mandate that florists sell every type of flower arrangement for every situation? Aren’t florists who don’t sell flower arrangements for weddings discriminating against customers who want to buy them and suppliers who want to provide the necessary raw products to the florists?
If an individual can discriminate against a business owner in any way, for any reason, and on any basis, then why can’t a business owner likewise discriminate against an individual?
That discrimination may be based on based on stereotypes, prejudice, hate, sexism, xenophobism, homophobism, bigotry, or racism is immaterial.
That discrimination may be because of race, creed, religion, sex, color, age, national origin, political ideology, IQ, physical appearance, marital status, socio-economic status, disability, gender identity or sexual orientation is irrelevant.
That someone thinks an act of discrimination is unfair, illogical, irrational, nonsensical, unreasonable, or just plain stupid is of no consequence.
Barronelle Stutzman should be able to choose to whom she will sell flowers or floral arrangements. Discrimination is the exercise of freedom.

Read more: https://mises.org/blog/right-discriminate-basic-property-right

Back later with why Libertarian Laurence M. Vance is so very wrong.

https://i1.wp.com/media-cdn.timesfr...h191df3fca2ebc9df713d46fee0b1610d4369fb03.jpg

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Here's what's wrong with Libertarian Laurence M. Vance's article entitled:

The Right to Discriminate Is a Basic Property Right

That discrimination may be because of race, creed, religion, sex, color, age, national origin, political ideology, IQ, physical appearance, marital status, socio-economic status, disability, gender identity or sexual orientation is irrelevant.
https://mises.org/blog/right-discriminate-basic-property-right

Note how Vance lumps immoral actions in with those that aren't. Why would a Christian business owner want to deny service based on someone's skin color? Why would a Christian business owner want to deny service to someone because of their sex, age, national origin, IQ, etc. etc.? (I can see a Christian business owner denying service to someone because of their political ideology. If a republicrat wanted a cake baked with a caricature of Donald Trump proudly holding the LGBTQ flag of death...).

If the business owner isn't a follower of Christ and believes that he has some kind of "right" to discriminate against people for things that aren't inherently immoral (sex, race, skin color, etc.) where does that supposed "right" to hate come from?

Certainly not God: Matthew 22:39

Libertarians are notorious for wanting to use God-given property rights
https://tifwe.org/the-biblical-roots-of-private-property/

for immoral actions (if you own the property, then it's your supposed "right" to sell drugs on it, open a house of prostitution, etc).

Libertarian Laurence M. Vance downplays the importance of religious freedom because the only religion that Libertarians like Laurence M. Vance worship is secular humanism.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

As I continue to expose the secular humanist Libertarian movement, a movement that is trying so very hard to pass themselves off as conservatives (again, what values are they conserving?), I'll talk about a foul mouthed greaser from the great State of Michigan who is running for the US Senate under the Republicrat Party ticket:

Robert James Ritchie, aka "Kid Rock".

On the surface Kid Rock looks palatable (as long as you don't have to listen to him talk, as he loves to use the "F-word" quite a bit), until you get to his core beliefs (from a 2014 article in Rolling Stone Magazine) :

'Rolling Stone' Asks Kid Rock His Political Views. He Doesn't Hold Back

...The “Cowboy” singer doesn't agree with every Republican ideal, however.
He does consider himself to be socially moderate, particularly with same-sex marriage and abortion rights. Rock touches on his opinions in the song “Ain't Enough Whisky,”*which can be found on his*new album:

“I am definitely a Republican*on fiscal issues and the military, but I lean to the middle on social issues. I am no fan of abortion, but it’s not up to a man to tell a woman what to do. As an ordained minister I don’t look forward to marrying gay people, but I’m not opposed to it,” Rock told*The Guardian*last month.

Read more: http://ijr.com/2015/02/259552-kid-r...ative-new-interview-rolling-stone-just-proof/

So being pro abortion and pro homosexuality is now considered "in the middle on social issues", i.e. "socially moderate"?

Whenever you talk to a Libertarian they'll use disclaimers like "I'm against...but I don't think that there should be a law against it".

How can a Libertarian be against the killing of unborn children and sodomy (and the agenda that goes with it) if he or she doesn't want laws that tell people what they're doing is wrong?

I'd ask some of TOL's very large Libertarian community to come forward and answer that question, but they're too busy trying to pass themselves off as conservatives.

https://uproxx.files.wordpress.com/2017/07/kid_rock_senate.jpg?quality=100&w=650

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Continuing exposing Libertarianism and the people who promote it:

Next up we have internet talk show personality Steven Crowder (seen here speaking with Dave Rubin, who has admitted voting for Libertarian Party Presidential candidate Gary Johnson: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Rubin ).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JSuA3GUuuMs

Steven Crowder puts on a great act, and if you didn't pay close attention you wouldn't know that he's a fraud. He calls himself a "conservative Christian" (which is redundant, as you can't be a follower of Christ without "conserving" His teachings) yet in reality is a Christian cherry picker (he's for the legalization of all recreational drugs; how can you love your neighbor as you'd love yourself if you're for the legalization of things that not only destroy the individual, but society at large?).

At the end of the video (13:00 minute mark), Crowder finally admits that he's a Libertarian.

 

[SabathMoon]

What values they are "conserving" is a question that none of them seem to want to answer.

Some of modern day leaders of the Libertarian movement are atheist Walter Block (who justified a father selling his 4 year old son..."who is not an adult"...to a member of the North American Man Boy Love Association).

Having known about Block-head for a longtime. He is all talk and no longer qualified to be even a pediatrician or physician. Not everyone who belongs to the Mises Institute as a scholar is a good person.

Others are Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell (aka Loony Rockwell) Laurence M. Vance and of course the late icon of the Libertarian movement, Murray Rothbard, who in an article justified parents murdering their disabled child.

They were not serious, but George Will was serious aborting kids with Down Syndrome. Maybe you should quit slandering now.

...The Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) attorneys who represented Stutzman argued: “It’s wrong for the state to force any citizen to support a particular view about marriage or anything else against their will. Freedom of speech and religion aren’t subject to the whim of a majority; they are constitutional guarantees.”

Washington’s attorney general, Bob Ferguson, said that “Arlene’s Flowers in Richland doesn’t have to sell wedding flowers at all.” However, “if they choose to sell wedding flowers, they cannot choose to sell wedding flowers only for heterosexual couples and deny that same service to gay couples.”

It is really no big deal. There are no laws which support gay marriage and selling flowers to stupid is still profitable. Business is not about freedom of speech, and Rand Paul is incorrect to say it is related only due to monetary usage.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

I see that one of TOL's many Libertarians (or is it one TOL Libertarian with many sock-puppet accounts?) has come to defend Libertarianism.

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
What values they are "conserving" is a question that none of them seem to want to answer.

Some of the modern day leaders of the Libertarian movement are atheist Walter Block (who justified a father selling his 4 year old son..."who is not an adult"...to a member of the North American Man Boy Love Association).

Having known about Block-head for a longtime. He is all talk and no longer qualified to be even a pediatrician or physician. Not everyone who belongs to the Mises Institute as a scholar is a good person.

After Murray Rothbard's expiration date came up, atheist Walter Block has been considered as the one who stepped up and took over Rothbard's role as the leader of the Libertarian movement.

Be respectful of your leader SB.

If you would like to name a few Mises Institute scholars who you consider to be "good people", I'll gladly discuss them.


Quote: Originally posted by aCutlureWarrior
Others are Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell (aka Loony Rockwell) Laurence M. Vance and of course the late icon of the Libertarian movement, Murray Rothbard, who in an article justified parents murdering their disabled child.

They were not serious,

When they say things in public speeches and public writings, they're not serious?

but George Will was serious aborting kids with Down Syndrome. Maybe you should quit slandering now.

It sounds to me like George Will has been reading the writings of Murray Rothbard. Oh and SB : if someone is lying about someone in person, it's slander, if it's in writing it's libel. I can back up everything that your Libertarian icons have said with proof.


Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
...The Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) attorneys who represented Stutzman argued: “It’s wrong for the state to force any citizen to support a particular view about marriage or anything else against their will. Freedom of speech and religion aren’t subject to the whim of a majority; they are constitutional guarantees.”

Washington’s attorney general, Bob Ferguson, said that “Arlene’s Flowers in Richland doesn’t have to sell wedding flowers at all.” However, “if they choose to sell wedding flowers, they cannot choose to sell wedding flowers only for heterosexual couples and deny that same service to gay couples.”

It is really no big deal. There are no laws which support gay marriage

Prior to the SCOTUS Lawrence v Texas ruling, numerous states (Washington being one of them) had legalized homosexual faux 'marriage'.

and selling flowers to stupid is still profitable. Business is not about freedom of speech, and Rand Paul is incorrect to say it is related only due to monetary usage.

I haven't talked about Libertarian Rand Paul (aka Jr. Paul) so I don't know what context you're using when speaking about him. As far as "business is not about freedom of speech", would you not agree that one's freedom of religion should carry over into their business practices?

 

[SabathMoon]

deleted

 

[SabathMoon]

If you would like to name a few Mises Institute scholars who you consider to be "good people", I'll gladly discuss them.

Much is made of Rand Paul's supposedly sexist paper at the Mises Institute. He was arguing the contrary, so as to argue the positive. Some say he was weaseling in this paper. He apparently is married to a woman as we speak.

Originally posted by aCutlureWarrior
Others are Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell (aka Loony Rockwell) Laurence M. Vance and of course the late icon of the Libertarian movement, Murray Rothbard, who in an article justified parents murdering their disabled child.

The trouble with arguing about capitalism and parenthood is that it doesn't work.

When they say things in public speeches and public writings, they're not serious?

The entire article first before accusing crypto-euthanasia.

It sounds to me like George Will has been reading the writings of Murray Rothbard. Oh and SB : if someone is lying about someone in person, it's slander, if it's in writing it's libel. I can back up everything that your Libertarian icons have said with proof.

Prior to the SCOTUS Lawrence v Texas ruling, numerous states (Washington being one of them) had legalized homosexual faux 'marriage'.

At least, it is fake. SCOTUS didn't legislate, rather the problem was already there. How many 'gay' don't want or care for same sex marriage? There are still nay subsidies for same sex marriage. It isn't going to happen.

I haven't talked about Libertarian Rand Paul (aka Jr. Paul) so I don't know what context you're using when speaking about him. As far as "business is not about freedom of speech", would you not agree that one's freedom of religion should carry over into their business practices?

If your religious practice interferes with fairness, mildly lewd is not an excuse. Thou shall not use you business to discipline someone by denying rental, just because you want to fix their stupid and promiscuous lifestyle.

As far as I am concerned, Lew Rockwell leads the Mises Institute, not Walter Block. But often times, they call it Ludwig Von Feces. The title is almost like porn. It is a amazing.

 

[SabathMoon]

“I am definitely a Republican*on fiscal issues and the military, but I lean to the middle on social issues. I am no fan of abortion, but it’s not up to a man to tell a woman what to do. As an ordained minister I don’t look forward to marrying gay people, but I’m not opposed to it,” Rock told*The Guardian*last month.

And you gullibly believed every word Kid Rock said. He is a Hollywood with about much interest in the issues as Donald Trump.