Eat chicken

For dinner last night I had me some Chick Fil'a. Not for any political reason but because I really like their chicken sandwiches with the buffalo sauce. It did however get me thinking about the recent Chick Fil'a hubbub.

So as I understand it the founder/head of the company, who has made his Christian beliefs no secret if you know anything about the company, said something along the lines of he supports the traditional biblical definition of marriage and I suppose this caused a backlash from the gay community because they saw this as aimed at them. I guess he has donated to charities that try to discourage being gay.

As a libertarian I feel both sides have valid points and I don't want to be seen as on one side or the other.

On the one one side i feel if people want to believe the gay lifestyle is sinful or wrong and donate to charities that discourage it, I think they are completely within their free speech rights. If they disagree with someone having sex with another of the same gender is wrong, it their opinion. Just like if they think pre-marital sex. They are allowed to believe that if they want. I may not agree with them, but free speech is easy to defend if everyone only said things I agree with. I do think some of the people on this side do want to prevent people from being gay or genuinely hate gays. I don't want to support that any more than I would support laws against pre-marital sex.

On the other side those that are gay or do not feel it is wrong have a right to boycott a business or person they don't agree with if they want to. I have decided that this is not important in my life. If I only bought from stores or people that were completely in line with my libertarian philosophy it would make my life pretty difficult. Those in the pro-gay camp do not have the right to force other to agree. They cannot use govt. to force other to think a certain way. There should not be thought police.

I buy from Chick Fil'a and Apple even though neither is completely in line with my politics. I will buy albums from Neil Young or Bruce Springsteen or Kid rock if I like their music, no matter what they believe, or the party they belong to. I would only stop if they encourage very extreme beliefs completely out of the main stream on both sides.

Where I have trouble is when they start using government to prevent people from doing what they want. It it doesn't directly affect another persons body or Property the government should stay out of it.

In my mind Marriage is a contract. Each state (yes this is a state issue) should have a standard marriage contract. it should state they want to get advantages of marriage such as inheritance rights, tax treatment and other special rights given by marriage in exchange they agree to let the courts decide property division and such in the event of divorce by predetermined rules. It should be pointed out that this marriage contract only affects the govt. and those individuals. Most of Rights that gay groups are fighting for is treatment from the govt. Inheritance rights, medical decisions, visa sponsorship, tax filling these are all shortcomings of the govt. Private companies should be able to give or reserve any rights they have irregardless or marriage. Many companies already give gay couples the same treatment they give married couples. They are free to do that no matter what the govt. does.

Some people might think that certain things are wrong and they should be free to say so. Some people may still feel that interracial marriage is wrong for what ever reason. I don't agree with them (seeing as my wife is Asian and I am not) , and I may feel that they are bigoted or misinformed but I would never try to use the government to force them to change their thinking.  Enforcing politically correct or right wing religious ideology on people is the not the way of freedom or tolerance. Yet we see it from both sides.

In my America, people are free to speak their minds and beliefs even if others don't agree, but not free to use govt. to force them on others. Whether they are pro-gay or antigay, religious or not. You can't tell others what to do.  You can boycott and speak your mind and donate to to your cause but you can't use laws to make it so.  I don't want to be in the middle but I guess I am. I will be the one standing for freedom for all. Besides the buffalo sauce is good on the waffle fries too.

There is a new King in town

Dear Candidate Romney and future conservative congress members.

Here is how we should use the federal governments vast taxing power.

Anyone not owning a gun - $ 5,00 tax penalty

No need to push for school vouchers anymore. Any one not providing private school for 

their children $4,000 tax penalty per child.

Anyone without sufficient retirement saving in a approved large banking institutions - $2,000 each year until savings are sufficient (sorry but Wall Street banks are big political  contributors

Anyone with a non-gas powered or hybrid car (you are avoiding gas taxes) - $2,000 penalty

Weigh over 300 pounds - $600 penalty (this ones for you Mayor Bloomberg).

You don’t have a computer Science degree but use a computer - $2,000 penalty. (this is completely self serving)

You don’t give enough to charity - $1,000 penalty (Called the Biden rule)

You don’t eat meat - $5,000 Penalty

You vacation in France - $800 Penalty

You don’t speak english well enough to pass a test  $700 fine

You don’t have a Toby Keith album - $300 Penalty

You don’t avoid buying Dixie Chicks albums $550 Penalty

People are free to do what they want but we get to tax them for anything we don't like. In fact we can tax them for any reason at any time. Now I know the original constitution was written to prevent taxes from being used in this way but we have managed over time to change that. We are now free use taxes as a weapon to punish those we disagree with.

The downside is if they win they do the same thing.

King George III is dead, long live the Federal Government, your new King

Liberals Love Control Not Government

Wisconsin highlights the idiotic center of liberal philosophy.  They have preached the greatness of government to do all things. They raise taxes to fund its gradual takeover of every aspect of our lives. Education, medicine, retirement. When the funds fall short they run deficits and raise taxes still higher, all because the almighty government is so great at doing things the free market and individual cannot do by themselves. The when the very government they extol, does something they don’t like they cry foul. They have recall elections. When those fail they throw insults around and cry foul.

Scott Walker is the Governor He was elected by the people to run the government. It seems the average liberal only loves government when it does as they wish. They wished to build up the government into the powerful beast it is. Controlling a huge part of the economy. Be careful what you wish for...

They seem to be mad that government employee's pay and benefits are being cut. Who should decide how much they should be paid. You wanted government education instead of a free market. In the free market the consumer ultimately decide? The unions who represent only one side and have no allegiance to taxpayer or the voter? On the other side when politicians they like are in office they have no problem with the fact the public employee unions fund the political campaigns creating a clear conflict of interest. That is alright with liberals as long as they get what they want. It seems they don’t want government to run things at all. If they did they would back the Governor. He is the rightly elected (twice) representative of the people of Wisconsin. Instead, they want things run as they see fit. It is a simple power grab. They don’t like the free market because they cannot control it. They cannot make it do their bidding by fiat.

Their rants show they don’t think government can run things best. Instead they think government is the best way to control how things run. When that doesn’t happen they cry like toddlers.

What is wrong with subsidized student loans

Big Wall street banks love them because they can loan billions to high
risk borrowers and the taxpayers guarantee the loans

Schools love them because they can raise tuition knowing the govt.
will provide the financing.

Politicians love them because they can appear they are helping
students when in reality they are raising costs which strengthens the
cycle of dependance on loans.

Meanwhile the middle class pays higher taxes and higher education costs.

Students are saddled with overwhelming debt that is not discharged in
bankruptcy and can be collected by extraordinary means.

This is a perfect example of lobbyist and special interest groups
using govt. for their benefit.  Anyone who criticizes it is labeled
selfish and evil for denying young adult when really it is the Fed. doing the harm.

The religious right should back Dr. Ron Paul

To all the religious right here is your wake up call. I know that most of you are normally one issue voters so lets get that out of the way first. Dr. Ron Paul is pro-life. Now that we have that out of the way it took the President's recent insurance changes to notice that the Fed. and state government has slowly been dismantling your freedoms and faith one step at a time.

When I grew up Catholic schools flourished because they were the best option to the cities miserable public schools. The government's unfair monopoly and subsidized price pressures had made religious schools struggle for years while all the so call right wing republicans twiddled their thumbs and only made occasional suggestions about vouchers but never made any real changes toward that ends. The recent recession was the tipping point and I think we will see private schools, all but very high end elite schools, disappear.

As they do, here is what we can expect to see. Decline of religion because the next generation of children have been taught it is unnecessary by govt. bureaucrats.

The further decline of the urban core because they will have no educational alternatives.

With less competition for students we can expect to see all schools performance to continue to spiral downwards because lack of competition always leads to complacency in a free society.

The politicians will then do what they always seem to do when they think they have to solve the problem. Rather then lessen government control which would actually spur innovation, they will tighten the govt. grip and pass more Federal laws to enforce educational improvements. They may even succeed at improving the schools that way. Of course, it will cost billions and will reduce freedom even further. Maybe they will outlaw homeschooling too. This is embraced by many of religious people as a way to teach their children according to their beliefs. I would say this is certainly next on Democratic checklist.

It appear that now that they have been successful at almost ending private education they have turned their attention to private charities like Hospitals and health facilities. Seemingly this is the next step in the Federal govt. taking power and choice from the people. It hasn't been until now that any of the major republican candidates seemed to notice this decline, They went right along with govt. schools and insurance regulation and tax codes that hurt families.  until the recent insurance birth control issue. None of the candidates that is except for Dr. Ron Paul.