http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polyandry_in_Tibet

It would at least save a lot of time and trouble of re-hashing this point over and over.

Whoa Radley, what happened to the love of gridlock you professed in 2004? Please don’t tell us that was just convenient cover….

I am truly sorry my earnestness wasn’t enough for you. But I did meant what I said about not engaging in an abortion debate. Nice try, though. +1 :D

Good day.

THis is a belief, not a fact. The FACT that 70% of all zygotes spontaneously abort within the first 4 weeks after conception strongly argues the opposite.

Of course if you believe that zygotes are persons from conception then you must conclude that since 70% of americans die in the first four weeks after conception that this is by far the greatest health care crisis facing the nation. What have you done about it?

brooks,

Thank you for being so gracious. As I hope you will continue to be with my lack of a proper close bold tag above! I really do appreciate it.

Now where’s that damned coffee?

Thank you,/b> for being so gracious. I really appreciate it.

It’s been at least ten years since an old friend of mine expressed his regret that there is no way to properly express explosive laughter while writing on the internet.

That’s fuckin’ precious.

This is the first time I’ve heard any halfway logical argument for preferring Obama over McCain. I was debating whether to vote for Bob Barr or McCain for the last couple of months. I felt that McCain was the lesser of evils to a small degree until he came rushing in to vote for the bailout. After watching him once again side with big government, I decided I had to vote for Bob Barr – wasted vote (so they say) or not. I dread the thought of the combination of Obama and a democratic congress, but there has to be a wake up call.

no problem.

(i’ve since looked at the site.)

i don’t begrudge you your opinion, and appreciate your considered response. i am not gung ho for/against, i just wonder about anyone who is satisfied with an all-or-nothing kind of stance. (nothing personal, of course.)

thanks, and well said.

Radley, I think you’re wrongly attributing strong comments about you to doctrinaire libertarians when I’ve always had the impression that they’re coming from republicans/conservatives of the Bush/McCain Lesser of two evils variety.

There are folks (your Eric Donderos, your Glenn Reynolds) who were once actual libertarians, but whose beliefs have morphed until they can cheerfully support the most big-government, socialistic, and anti-freedom policies of Team Red. Just like Bill O’Reilly, they try to set themselves apart from the political faction they obviously support in order to have extra credibility; he calls himself an “independent”, while they call themselves “libertarians”.

Jefferson, I interpret you voting as cutting me off in traffic. So let me flip you the bird (hopefully in a tactful way).

A vote for Barr is more than worthless. It is supportive of the machinery of State. By voting, you increase the level of violence in the world and enable the State to amplify your violence exponentially.

Staying home, while easier from a physical standpoint, is morally courageous, especially if done in principle and publicly.

Think what you want — thinking is generally a worthwhile endeavor. But be honest with yourself as you enter that confessional booth on Election Day and commit your secret violence upon your fellow man.

- Will Wilkinson, research fellow at the Cato Institute. (http://www.culture11.com/node/32425?page_art=2)

I couldn’t possibly vote for McCain or Obama. So, my choice is Barr or staying home. Staying home is easier, and what I often do, but this time I think a vote for Barr is important. If it’s tight, and Barr captures enough to votes to “Naderize” McCain, it will send a message to Republicans.

I know that sending this message is not likely to change anything, but it still feels good. When someone cuts you off in traffic, they are asking for you to flip them the bird. If you don’t go ahead and send them the message, it feels like unfinished business.

And don’t forget, here in the FLA, it doesn’t take many votes to fuck things all up!

I learned a long time ago that an abortion debate is a waste of time and a cause of significant negative feelings and thoughts toward those who hold opposing sides. I was not trying to entice you or anyone else into a discourse about it. And I will never engage in such debate again. It is hopeless and while I do care about it very much, I care more about the well-being of the people that I speak with on a day-to-day basis, be it on the internet or in person. Be it friend or ‘foe’. :D

I did not provide the link nor points from their page for you or anyone else who shares your opinion (the majority of Radley’s readers, I know – I’ve been here for a LONG time) so much as I put it there because someone asked if there was a libertarian stance on pro-life. I merely provided what was asked for. But if you find it informative one way or the other, I am pleased.

It is futile to expect anyone with a modicum of intelligence to change their mind over one of the most polarizing subjects in human history. I know I can never do that and nor would I even try. Everyone has their opinion and is, of course, entitled to it. I respect all arguments on all sides now. I didn’t used to be that way. But I have learned a great deal from the people who post here and am now quite capable of living in harmony with differences of opinion like this. I kind of said what I am about to say before but it is important to me that I be understood on this point so I will reiterate it. As far as I am concerned, all an abortion debate does is cause bad feelings and negativity to rise up in people that would not have been there otherwise. So out of respect for my fellow human beings, I just can’t do it knowing how sensitive this subject is to folks. I have unknowingly said enough to hurt or upset people in my life without engaging in something I know will cause harm to one person or another.

Good day.

Any individual vote has the most negligible influence on an election.

Aggregate votes influence elections, but no matter which candidate wins, the real winner is the State.

As I have demonstrated above, voting is force, force is violence, violence is the State, and elections are the only State-sanctioned form of violence allowed to the citizenry. The franchise is the manifestation of the myth of popular sovereignty, a secular sacrament, without which the State’s violence would be naked in plain sight.

Thus, if true change is desired, not merely changing the direction in which the guns are pointed, it is NOT VOTING in the aggregate that is the most effective.

Emma Goldman said, “If voting could change anything, it would be illegal.”

My corollary is, “If NOT voting could change anything, it would be illegal.”

Many States have mandatory voting laws. Were my ideas ever to become popular, you bet your sweet ass the U.S. would enact mandatory voting laws.