The race for President in 2016 is about to enter its next phase as presumptive nominees emerge from their respective political parties after a year-long battle.
With the highly controversial Donald Trump being the last active campaign amongst Republicans, and the highly corrupt Hillary Clinton close to being the presumptive nominee of the Democratic Party over rival Bernie Sanders (as of this posting), many people are dismayed and looking for alternative choices. So let’s look at one of the main third party alternatives, the Libertarian Party.
I am someone who tends to feel too libertarian for the Republican Party and not libertarian enough for the Libertarian Party. I am always looking into their nominees as potential candidates to support and leaving underwhelmed.
The Libertarian Party convention on this 29th day in May, 2016 has nominated Gary Johnson, former Governor of New Mexico (1995-2003).
Why am I underwhelmed? Let’s look at what troubles me about his advocacy.
An exchange at a Libertarian Party candidate debate, between Gary Johnson and Austin Petersen on John Stossel’s show, highlights well his problem…
Johnson takes the un-libertarian position that governments can punish those who exercise their free-will to not participate in something that is against their beliefs. We’re not talking about a physical harm between two parties; we are talking about an exercise of conscience. Here, it is baking a cake specific for a homosexual wedding. It could be any kind of situation where a customer asks a business to engage in something against one’s beliefs. In this light, Petersen rightly makes a comparison about forcing a Jewish baker to bake a cake for a Nazi customer. You can see Johnson squirm as his libertarian credentials take a serious hit. Johnson favors punishing who he has a disagreement of conscience over a misguided “progressive” interpretations of discrimination and equality. He ultimately favors empowering the state over the individual. He favors compulsion.
Now although Petersen rightfully does not want to grant government this abusive power, he shows his disdain for this not-so-hypothetical baker who wants to exercise individual choice and right of refusal, and Peterson would team up with the Gaystapo bullies against this baker and call the baker names. And his snide remark about who would want to eat at this baker’s shop? I would. And so would people of my moral values. I stand up for the bullied. I despise bullies and the Gaystapo are some of the worst bullies out there, and they have many allies in politics, media, education, and the entertainment industry.
Johnson is typical of those who falsely think of homosexual rights in the same terms as those who fought for equality amongst the races, and yet cannot see the preborn child in the same terms. Race is a trait beyond one’s control. Age, development, and location are beyond the control of the pre-born child. However, in regards to sexual unions, free-will is very much in one’s own personal control. To claim otherwise is to claim that you are nothing but a machine that cannot function beyond its own programming. It is not open to rationalization and reason; it is bound and limited and unchangeable. There are plenty of people who have indeed changed, for better or worse. But poor is the man who cannot make decisions based on evidence but rather succumbing to ones own alleged wiring.
It is intellectually dishonest to compare homosexual unions with any other kind of true civil rights activism (race, gender, or pre-born status).
As a civil rights advocate, I have trouble voting for anybody who does not see the humanity of the pre-born child, protected under Amendment Five as well as Amendment Fourteen. Johnson wants the abortion issue given back to the states (which is a good start, better than what we have now) but supports legalized abortion up to “viability” (and that is certainly open for debate and criticism; who’s to say which pre-born child is “viable?”).
And as a civil rights advocate, if you aren’t supporting my religious liberty, you aren’t earning my vote. I should not be bullied, fined and imprisoned for my beliefs. As a student of history, I feel a strong kinship with the slavery abolitionists. Some would claim those abolitionists were “pushing their morality” as well, to which I say, “So what?” Civil rights trump what you see as a right if you are advocating immorality. Slavery abolitionists were bullied, imprisoned, and even killed for their advocacy. I stand in good company with good people.
I will not tolerate government force, even when it is advocated by a Libertarian. No thanks, Gary Johnson. Another third party candidate, who recognizes religious liberty and the civil rights of the pre-born, will earn my vote, if such a candidate is on my ballot in November.