Reagan. (I don't consider being weak on foreign policy or the Einzige definition of libertarian, which is "liberal Democrat" to be libertarian)
He wanted to butt into the private lives of most Americans with his opposition to abortion and gay marriage.
For one thing, having an abortion is not a "private matter" ... not when the unborn child doesn't get its say. Gay marriage wasn't even an issue then.
Well, Reagan was against gay rights. As for abortion, even though I agree with you that murdering innocent babies is NOT a private matter, libertarians think that it is, and thus I proved my point that Reagan was not a libertarian (or even came close to one). Also, the Fed was very active under Reagan's watch, and libertarians oppose the Fed.
Libertarians don't consider murder a "private matter". Abortion is a violation of individual rights and very anti-libertarian.
Not all libertarians are against abortion, though. Many of them support abortions.
No.
People who support abortion are not libertarians.
Then I'm not a libertarian.
Don't let what Libertas interpretations on what is or isn't libertarian change what is really libertarian: The Non Agression Principle.
While Libertas likes to argue that a mass of cells somehow constitutes life and that aborting it is coersion, I (and many other libertarians) argue that the act of putting a gun to a woman's head and forcing her to have a baby she doesn't want to have is also coersion. The difference between the two positions? My position (which isn't even that radically pro-choice to begin with besides what I think of fetuses, pretty much just leave it up to the states and abolish taxation regarding abortion) doesn't require the coersive arm of the state to enforce my views on others. That is the essence of the "pro-choice" position, as opposed to the so-called "pro-life" position, it is all about choice, the government doesn't walk into those women's houses and tell them they have to have an abortion, a "pro-life" person would have the government bust open abortion clinics and throw women and doctors by the hundreds of thousands into jail thus making our prison problem way worse than it already is and other women seeking abortions would be forced into the back alleys with "doctors" who specialize in this sort of matter with unsafe equipment to do it. ABORTION WOULD NOT STOP IF IT'S ILLEGAL, JUST LIKE DRUGS DIDN'T GO AWAY WITH THE WAR ON DRUGS OR ALCOHOL DIDN'T GO AWAY WITH PROHIBITION, IT'S ALL THE SAME THING.
But Libertas insists that only prolifers can be libertarians because somehow a woman aborting a mass of cells is taking away another individual's right to life. Well fine then Libertas, if you believe in the words of the bible you can't be a libertarian because the bible is filled with big government propaganda.
See what happens when you engage in purist dogma?
Poll
