From: lfoard@Turing.ORG (Lawrence C. Foard)
Subject: Re: What's libertarianism?
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 19:25:09 GMT

In article <1992Aug13.051022.2925@spdcc.com> msimpson@spdcc.com (Michael L. R. Simpson) writes:
>
>	The discussion of libertarianism is certainly an interesting
>topic.  I don't see any conflict between my homosexuality and my
>libertarianism.  However, in following this thread, I haven't seen any
>a part of the discussion that is peculiar to homosexuality.  Most
>[Ll]ibertarians I know range from agnostic to enthusiastic on the
>subject of homosexuality, but they're all united in a belief that the
>State (substitute other levels of elected government as needed) doesn't
>have any business condoning, sanctioning or opposing homosexuality. [Or
>heterosexuality, for that matter -- but that wasn't on the list.]
>	Previous discussion of libertarianism in soc.motss have gone
>nowhere fast, but I'm always willing to entertain a private e-mail
>discussion on "Libertarianism and Homosexuality:  Do We Have To Choose?"
>(or other humorously pedantic topic of one's choice).

I tend toward the libertarian side but unfortunitly in my experience
the libertarians on the net are the most homophobic of anyone. I find
it bizarre that someone supports the right to take drugs, the right
to own guns but doesn't support the right of consenting people to
have sex (I also find it bizarre that some gbl's support the war
on drugs). 

I'm not a radical libertarian, I believe there are things that the
government has to do beyond defense. Basically the government is needed
to do things that corporations can't or won't do, however its concievable
that charity's could replace much of that as well (but I wouldn't count
on it).

For example in the fight against HIV the government will spend money
on something and then give away exclusive rights to a company. If 
industry isn't willing to fund development they shouldn't be getting
the profits. AZT should either be unpatented or licensed to any
and all companies that want to make it for a reasonable fee (with the
money going to pay back the cost of government research). The current
scam where the medical companies get exclusive rights to government 
funded research is nothing short of disgusting.

Why is there no government funding for research on DNCB (could it have
something to do with no companies being able to make money on it?)?

Now to offend both conservatives and liberals :-)

If I had my way highways, the post office and virtually all other
government bodies that could function as companies would be sold
off, but the government would take over medical insurance since
private industry has proven that it can't provide it adequately.

I would also get rid of income tax and have only a sales tax
which would be made progressive by refunding a fixed amount of
money to everyone.

Remove any government mandate from marriage and leave it up to individuals
to write there own marriage contracts (no income tax so no need for
different tax rates for married couples).  

-------------------------------------
Write in entropy for president 92 :-)
(just kidding I'm not 35 yet)
-------------------------------------
-- 
>>Unix/C Contract worker available 5 years C/unix work experience<<  ______
Available for Telecommuting/Travel and contracts on the T Line       \    /
in the Boston MA area. Send me e-mail for a copy of my Resume.        \  /
       -- VWIS 508-793-9568 (2400 baud), Linux support BBS.--          \/
Xref: sparky talk.politics.misc:40678 alt.politics.elections:10981 alt.politics.clinton:2260 alt.politics.bush:2176