Rand Paul equivocated on the Civil Rights Act (later, he un-equivocated.)
Althouse avoids the question of moral imperatives--which, by the way, happens to be the ONLY significant question in the matter.
The hard-nosed Libertarian position (couched here in 'property rights' language) is not easy to reconcile with that Golden Rule thing--which happens to be a moral imperative.
Same goes for the 1st Amendment argument. The moral imperative is that 'error has no rights;' thus "free speech" is limited to only that which is not clearly erroneous, as is partially reflected in the libel/slander laws.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
And THAT is why i can't go "all-in" on Libertarianism even though I lean that way.And THAT is why i can't go "all-in" on Libertarianism even though I lean that way.
Post a Comment