From: mike@gordian.com (Michael A. Thomas)
Newsgroups: pa.general,alt.politics.libertarian
Subject: Re: Perry for U.S. Senate
Date: 16 Oct 92 17:48:40 GMT
Distribution: pa
Organization: Gordian; Costa Mesa, CA

In article <7694@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>, rjl+@pitt.edu (Richard J. Loether) writes:
> In article <Xqg7RB1w165w@topcat> topcat!tom@tredysvr.tredydev.unisys.com (Tom Albrecht) writes:
> >
> <Dr. John Perry is a candidate for the U.S. Senate from Pennsylvania on the
> <Libertarian party ticket.
> <
> <Dr. Perry is a pro-life, fiscally conservative alternative to Arlen Specter
> <and Lynn Yeakel.
> <
> <His overall philosophy of government is summed up in his statement:
> <"Government should promote and encourage strong families, individual
> <self-government, a high level of personal responsibility, and love of God
> <and His Law."
> 
> I would very much like to find a suitable alternative to Specter and 
> Yeakel.  As a Libertarian, I like the idea of voting for Perry but his
> statement that "Government should promote...love of God and His Law" to
> be profoundly troubling.  Could I get some clarification on this please?

  Gad, I'm a pretty hard core libertarian and I wouldn't vote
for this clown. Is this the same guy that is running dead fetus ads
too? This sounds *much* more like Randall Terry sent one of his 
lambs over to get on a ticket -- any ticket in Pa. This guy sounds
more like Pat Buchanan then any libertarian. Remember one thing:
just because somebody claims that are X doesn't make it necessarily
so.
  And this line about family. What exactly should the government do
to "encourage and promote strong families"? These are the GOP code words
for bigotry toward gays and lesbians this election. The government
has no interest in "families" (whatever *they* are) other than to
stay the hell out of their consentual dealings. The problem is with
government sticking its nose in our business, not with some nebulous
lack of support.

> <Regarding the federal government, he believes "the federal bureaucracy must
> <be cut down to constitutional size, with taxes being cut proportionally."
> <
> <"Parents should have absolute freedom of educational choice for their
> <children, unencumbered by a taxation system which discriminates against
> <those parents choosing alternatives to public education."  He says,
> <"Education is exclusively the responsibility of parents."  "Government's
> <proper role and responsibility in education is to secure the right to
> <educational choice, not abridge it."
> <
> <
> <Who is Jack Perry?

   This guy is a dyed in the wool Robertson Republican. The republicans
have co-opted the school choice issue, but their *reasons* are along 
religious lines rather then *choice* lines. Although it is not necessarily
bad having the republicans join up for choice, I'm not at all happy about
the way it is getting presented (like, we want school money so we can send
our kids to Bigots-r-Us elementary school). In the long run this may very
well backfire.
   Barf. We don't need the Religious Right's intolerance in the LP!
-- 

		Michael Thomas	(mike@gordian.com)
	"I don't think Bambi Eyes will get you that flame thrower..."  
		-- Hobbes to Calvin
		USnail: 20361 Irvine Ave Santa Ana Heights, Ca,	92707-5637
		PaBell: (714) 850-0205 (714) 850-0533 (fax)
Newsgroups: pa.general,alt.politics.libertarian