The Libertarian Party

First, any true understanding of any party should be found from the source. If you really want to know more about the Libertarians, go here.

I’ve been more and more attracted to the Libertarian party for some time. I think much of that has come from two key principles espoused by that party:

  1. Live and let live
  2. Smaller, local government

There is, of course, much more to this party, but those two principles are things I believe in.

Live and let live is a generally sound principle, but I wonder sometimes if the Libertarians go too far. I know that the party itself has come out against any kind of legislation regarding the practice of marriage. That is something that my religious beliefs contradict with, and I feel a particularly strong desire to stand by prophetic counsel guarding the sanctity of marriage.

That action would defy that live and let live principle, but I find relief in knowing that that kind of attitude is still acceptable within the party. I think the defining moment for me was when I realized that both pro-life and pro-abortion people do exist in the Libertarian party and do so at ease knowing that their opinions are mutually respected. They don’t necessarily agree, but as a principle, the party allows for personal decisions and intentions to co-exist.

I like that.

The second principle is something I strongly agree with as well. Our current  government is an ungainly behemoth lumbering through history. I would much rather have a trim local government acting directly on my behalf with broader coordination on the federal level. In short, my local issues are best handled by my local leaders.

To put this in another perspective, I like the way the church works. Local leadership is most directly involved with our lives with general leadership providing broad, inspired counsel and specific guidance where required. It’s a system that works well partly because there is no aspiration to rise up the ranks, but primarily because we as a people have learned to rely on local leadership before general leadership.

How improved our nation would be if we each took our issues to our local city councils and mayors instead of national leadership.

The actual platform of the party goes on to list a host of other thoughts and ideas that, in general, I find to have a broad personal level of acceptance. Before declaring allegiance here, however, I still need the party to develop candidates that are justifiably worthy of my vote. I think this is the one critical failing of the party, to tell the truth. And honestly, most of the candidates I have seen from this party tend to appear so fringe that they are recognizable as nothing except extreme or possible even insane. (Sorry, but you know that has a measure of truth for any third party candidate.)

Ah, to dream of the perfect candidate…. I’ve long told Jeffrey, the person who really got me looking at the Libertarian party, that I’d vote for him. And frankly, I’ve long intended on someday running for local office. But I just might be insane, too, for all you know. 🙂


And thus closes my political missives for a while. These past two days with Obama’s budget farce, the State of the Union address and the associated rebuttals, and other things has left me frustrated with our government. To borrow quite loosely from Lincoln, I’ve written my angry letters. Now it’s best to sit on them and let the frustration dissipate.

See you on the other side.

This entry was posted in Dave-isms. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to The Libertarian Party

  1. nosurfgirl says:

    I’ve wanted to comment on both your posts, but I want to spend time on my comments and dang it, time is in short supply for me these days. Siiiiigh.

    I have a few things to say, though. I think largely I agree with a great deal of what you say. I think, though, that I have realized i”m an insufferable liberal in some areas. Which is good because it means I can add to the conversation and challenge you and jeffrey and you guys (and I) develop even better understanding of our own beliefs and the philosophies that underlie them, as well as a better and more thorough understanding of the way government works and its role in our lives (according to what we each believe.)

  2. June says:

    Dave, there is no conflict between your belief in the sanctity of marriage and Libertarianism. In fact, it is precisely because some people believe that marriage is a sacrament that the government should stay out of it.

    George Washington never got a license to marry Martha. The wedding was preformed by their minister and recorded in the back of the family bible. The government then recognized their union as legitimate.

    Today it would probably be best for all couples who marry (and even those that don’t) to establish a contract for domestic partnership which should be protected by the government as it would the terms of any other voluntary contract. It should be left to each church to decide who they will and won’t honor with their sacrament of marriage and it should have no bearing on the enforcement of a contract of domestic partnership. I think most Libertarians would like to see the word marriage disappear from our law books.

  3. daveloveless says:

    Thanks June. I could actually live with that. I personally think that defining the government’s role in marriage as regarding a more public contract for legal purposes and leaving the rest to churches would be a relatively simple and effective way of solving the arguments on this matter.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s