PDA

View Full Version : Dondero: "The State doesn't own your child" is now controversial according to MSNBC




RonPaulFanInGA
02-03-2015, 02:48 PM
http://www.libertarianrepublican.net/2015/02/the-state-doesnt-own-your-child-parents.html


Rand (and Chris Christie) weigh in on Vaxxer controversy

Wow. Just wow. The freakoids at MSNBC think that any parent who says that the state shouldn't own their children is engagine in extremist "libertarian" right-wing fringe talk.

Interestingly, they both criticized Chris Christie for also adopting the libertarian view against mandated vaccinations.

roho76
02-03-2015, 02:54 PM
The time is nigh.

Brett85
02-03-2015, 04:05 PM
Even President Obama has taken the libertarian position against mandated vaccines.

https://www.facebook.com/JulieBorowski/photos/a.131262630333620.22202.131110227015527/640335402759671/?type=1&theater

Crashland
02-03-2015, 04:19 PM
No, the controversy isn't whether the state owns the child - the controversy is whether or not parents "own" their children.

NIU Students for Liberty
02-03-2015, 07:56 PM
Why did you provide a link to that asshole's website?

green73
02-03-2015, 07:59 PM
Why did you provide a link to that asshole's website?

This.

Christian Liberty
02-03-2015, 08:25 PM
No, the controversy isn't whether the state owns the child - the controversy is whether or not parents "own" their children.

I doubt Rand Paul is literally saying parents own their children. I think its obvious that his point is that parents have the right to raise their children as they see fit without government interference. Which is the libertarian view.

Crashland
02-03-2015, 08:40 PM
I doubt Rand Paul is literally saying parents own their children. I think its obvious that his point is that parents have the right to raise their children as they see fit without government interference. Which is the libertarian view.

Yes I am sure he did not mean it in the literal sense, especially because he was using it to contrast to make the point that the state does not own the children. But if people are just hearing that clip I can see why there is controversy.

r3volution 3.0
02-04-2015, 07:05 AM
Yes I am sure he did not mean it in the literal sense, especially because he was using it to contrast to make the point that the state does not own the children. But if people are just hearing that clip I can see why there is controversy.

I can see why the media would hang on that statement. On its face, it's sounds a little odd (could have been worded better). But, on two seconds thought, any non-retarded individual should be able to infer what Rand meant (parents have the right to their raise children as they see fit), because - what else could he have meant? Surely no one could seriously believe that Sen. Rand Paul is advocating child slavery.

devil21
02-04-2015, 07:34 PM
The time is nigh.

This issue does seem like it's being timed for something bigger. Probably a mandatory ebola vaccine program in the works.

rich34
02-04-2015, 10:07 PM
This issue does seem like it's being timed for something bigger. Probably a mandatory ebola vaccine program in the works.

Could be, but the bigger issue is increasing the power of state in the minds of the people. And at the same time labeling the type of person that supports this as far right/libertarian nut jobs. And owe did i forget, yeah those are Rand supporters.

And one smear leads to another, while Jeb is out playing golf without having to spend a single dollar to drive Rands negatives up.

Oh Christ, get ready indeed, hell this will be the dirtiest nomination process in history. Even Romney wasn't immune from the msm, Bush has em working for him...

Sola_Fide
02-04-2015, 10:12 PM
No, the controversy isn't whether the state owns the child - the controversy is whether or not parents "own" their children.

That's not a controversy...except to atheistic anarchists who don't understand that the very philosophy they espouse sets them on the road back to statism.

Crashland
02-04-2015, 10:31 PM
That's not a controversy...except to atheistic anarchists who don't understand that the very philosophy they espouse sets them on the road back to statism.

Oh? What philosophy is that?

Sola_Fide
02-04-2015, 11:04 PM
Oh? What philosophy is that?

Atomistic anarchism.

Christian Liberty
02-04-2015, 11:24 PM
That's not a controversy...except to atheistic anarchists who don't understand that the very philosophy they espouse sets them on the road back to statism.


Atomistic anarchism.

Parental rights and parents actually owning their children aren't the same thing.