|
In Reply to: Re: Declaration sent in posted by Libertarian on October 15, 2006 at 19:35:53:
You might have asked me what "beliefs" I was referencing before you began you verbose defense. Since TF "claim," and I have no evidence otherwise, that they haven't condoned sex with children since the '80's, I wasn't including that practice in what I meant by their current "beliefs." I was thinking of their open-marriage, swingers policy, which, imo, is not healthy for children or anyone for that matter. Furthermore, I did not declare any moral judgement in my comment. My intention was to point out that secular progressives, who have a greater voice in California than some areas of the nation, are less inclined toward moral absolutes, particularly in regard to sex. Therefore, and this is only speculation, this attitude could influence the outcome of the trial.
_____________
"Most libertarians would say that what goes on between consenting adults is nobody's business but their own as long as no crimes are being committed. It's called the right to privacy, and it's protected from government intrusion by the Constitution."
If children happen to be present but not included in the sex act, would that be condoned?
"We don't believe in being the morals police, AND we don't believe anyone can successfully legislate and enforce Judeo-Christian standards of personal morality."
You are reading much more into my comment than was intentioned.
"I find your generalizations about "secular progressives," and "politically correct attitudes" personally offensive. Has anyone on the GenX board attacked your belief system lately with misleading characterizations and false generalizations?"
YOU overreacted. However, since you brought it up, PC is usually not supported by Libertarians on the grounds of free speech.
