Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 182

Thread: Rand wouldn't punish feds who used Ashley Madison

  1. #1

    Rand wouldn't punish feds who used Ashley Madison

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/p...shley-madison/

    If it were up to Paul, the dogs would be called off. In fact, a question about the hack and the employees appeared to be Paul's introduction to the world of Ashley Madison.

    "I keep seeing that headline, but I'm terrible -- I don't know what it is," Paul said. "So, she has done something illicit?"

    Paul's spokesman Sergio Gor explained that the hacking story broke while the senator was in Haiti (performing pro bono eye surgeries) and Kentucky (convincing the state Republican Party to hold a caucus to nominate a Senate candidate in 2016). Paul remained perplexed.

    "It’s called the Ashley Madison Web site?" he asked. "I don’t know if adultery is against the law still. In some states, there are old laws against adultery, but I think if we start going after people and locking people up for adultery we’re headed for a bizarre world."

    No 2016 candidate has spent as much time attacking cases of federal worker malpractice -- it's a surefire applause generator. Carly Fiorina, who in some polls of Iowa has moved past Paul, is fond of telling audiences that many federal workers waste their office time reading pornography.

    But Paul would save his opprobrium for wastes of money; the Ashley Madison witch-hunt would have to go on without him. After he answered the question, Paul followed a photographer's directions for a portrait that would run in local media. He stayed mostly still, only turning his head to complete the thought.


    "My wife will be happy that I’d never heard of this Web site," he said.




  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Not for "locking up" but there's a pretty dang good libertarian argument for banning adultery...
    This post represents only the opinions of Christian Liberty and not the rest of the forum. Use discretion when reading

  4. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Christian Liberty View Post
    Not for "locking up" but there's a pretty dang good libertarian argument for banning adultery...
    "He's talkin' to his gut like it's a person!!" -me
    "dumpster diving isn't professional." - angelatc
    "You don't need a medical degree to spot obvious bullshit, that's actually a separate skill." -Scott Adams
    "When you are divided, and angry, and controlled, you target those 'different' from you, not those responsible [controllers]" -Q

    "Each of us must choose which course of action we should take: education, conventional political action, or even peaceful civil disobedience to bring about necessary changes. But let it not be said that we did nothing." - Ron Paul

    "Paul said "the wave of the future" is a coalition of anti-authoritarian progressive Democrats and libertarian Republicans in Congress opposed to domestic surveillance, opposed to starting new wars and in favor of ending the so-called War on Drugs."

  5. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Christian Liberty View Post
    Not for "locking up" but there's a pretty dang good libertarian argument for banning adultery...
    Well, what they do in their private lives are not their employers business, but if they used government emails, well...

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by Christian Liberty View Post
    Not for "locking up" but there's a pretty dang good libertarian argument for banning adultery...
    What's that?

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Sola_Fide View Post
    What's that?
    Thou shalt not commit adultery ?

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by timosman View Post
    Thou shalt not commit adultery ?
    What's that have to do with legislation?

  9. #8
    Seems like a random question to ask and write an article about. If they spent their own money and did it on their own time I'm not sure why it would require an investigation. But any non-negative article that puts his name in a headline is good, and the end has a funny line.


    Quote Originally Posted by Christian Liberty View Post
    Not for "locking up" but there's a pretty dang good libertarian argument for banning adultery...
    Hmm, I'll try just for the sake of a thought experiment...

    If people that get a government issued marriage license are subject to laws that would cause millions of them to become criminals, but people that just get married on their own without one are not... then maybe people will stop seeking government's permission and inviting them to be a third party in their relationships.



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Christian Liberty View Post
    Not for "locking up" but there's a pretty dang good libertarian argument for banning adultery...
    To ban it at the federal level? State level? Are you serious? I thought Rand and Ron were leading the leave me alone coalition? While I agree adultery is not cool at all, but two consenting adults?? What would the punishment be, stone them in public? I think it's best left between the individuals. Besides, Christ had his chance to take blood in a similar situation, but he choose mercy over blood.

  12. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by rich34 View Post
    To ban it at the federal level? State level? Are you serious? I thought Rand and Ron were leading the leave me alone coalition? While I agree adultery is not cool at all, but two consenting adults?? What would the punishment be, stone them in public? I think it's best left between the individuals. Besides, Christ had his chance to take blood in a similar situation, but he choose mercy over blood.
    What they get from their spouse after they find out usually is enough punishment. imo.
    "I am a bird"

  13. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    dannno, there are people on this site ready to throw us all back to the 1850s. Haven't you heard?

  14. #12
    I'm wondering if some of the RPF members Carlybee and I were arguing with last night wouldn't be in favor of having these outed Ashley Madison members publicly stoned. Apparently Rand is much too progressive (read:libertine) for their taste.

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by dannno View Post
    Well, the bible talks of marriage making a couple "one flesh", so if libertarians agree to the idea of marriage contracts, then part of that contract simply needs to state that each others bodies belong to the other and thus adultery without both parties consenting would be considering a property violation (sort of like rape).

    See? Not that hard.
    When a trumpet sounds in a city, do not the people tremble?
    When disaster comes to a city, has not the Lord caused it? Amos 3:6

  16. #14
    Govt employees abusing the Internet on govt. servers is rampant--they are so bored they do all kinds of crazy stuff. There is no workplace culture that says "don't do that". My company, which has govt. contracts, has security software that blocks you out of all that.
    This is about creating workplace culture, not dragging people out with the Scarlett letter A on their e-mail signatures. Good for Rand for not driving this off the cliff.

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by Sola_Fide View Post
    What's that?
    It is a violation of contract after all.

    Of course, I'm not a libertarian, and I see marriage covenant as much more than a contract, but there ya go.

    Honestly, I think its pure humanism to keep this legal.

    Quote Originally Posted by cajuncocoa View Post
    I'm wondering if some of the RPF members Carlybee and I were arguing with last night wouldn't be in favor of having these outed Ashley Madison members publicly stoned. Apparently Rand is much too progressive (read:libertine) for their taste.
    Well, not exactly, since its not currently against the law and punishment can't usually be ex post facto. Plus, its the victims who decide to push for the death penalty and undoubtedly some wouldn't.
    This post represents only the opinions of Christian Liberty and not the rest of the forum. Use discretion when reading

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by cajuncocoa View Post
    I'm wondering if some of the RPF members Carlybee and I were arguing with last night wouldn't be in favor of having these outed Ashley Madison members publicly stoned. Apparently Rand is much too progressive (read:libertine) for their taste.
    No, he's not. He's for keeping the fedeeral government out of it, if they were doing this on their own time.

    In that other thread, you on the other hand, seemed to be all for the federal government giving their high 5 to gay marriage and sodomy.

    Huge difference.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by wizardwatson View Post
    Well, the bible talks of marriage making a couple "one flesh", so if libertarians agree to the idea of marriage contracts, then part of that contract simply needs to state that each others bodies belong to the other and thus adultery without both parties consenting would be considering a property violation (sort of like rape).

    See? Not that hard.
    CL called for a ban on adultery...that's what prompted dannno's response that you quoted. Now, are we talking about a State ban on adultery? Which you're justifying by using the biblical definition of marriage? If so, I would remind you both...we do not have a theocracy! And could we please try to reduce things the State has its ugly nose in, rather than increase them? I thought that's what most people on this site were about...well, at least it was in 2007.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by wizardwatson View Post
    Well, the bible talks of marriage making a couple "one flesh", so if libertarians agree to the idea of marriage contracts, then part of that contract simply needs to state that each others bodies belong to the other and thus adultery without both parties consenting would be considering a property violation (sort of like rape).

    See? Not that hard.
    Uh, yeah no pun intended, but it is that hard. Rape is a force-able act, without the two consenting, and is essentially a vicious assault. Two people agreeing to have sex doesn't include any of that. I'm sorry, but this is a slippery slope, literally.. What else in the Bible can we find that is a non violent sin do we want to make punishable by federal law? What if we don't love our neighbor, or give every pan handler we see money? Christ said to "give to everyone that asks." I'm not trying to be difficult, just asking thought provoking questions.

  22. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    No, he's not. He's for keeping the fedeeral government out of it, if they were doing this on their own time.

    In that other thread, you on the other hand, seemed to be all for the federal government giving their high 5 to sodomy.

    Huge difference.
    It's so archaic to describe oral sex between consenting adults (possibly even married consenting adults) as "sodomy" in 2015 ... like I said, we're getting thrown back to a different era here, boys and girls. Yes, I am 100% for keeping the federal government out of the bedroom of consenting adults. You bet I am. I'm for smaller, less intrusive government.

  23. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by cajuncocoa View Post
    It's so archaic to describe oral sex between consenting adults (possibly even married consenting adults) as "sodomy" in 2015 ... like I said, we're getting thrown back to a different era here, boys and girls. Yes, I am 100% for keeping the federal government out of the bedroom of consenting adults. You bet I am. I'm for smaller, less intrusive government.
    "You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to cajuncocoa again." +1

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Christian Liberty View Post
    It is a violation of contract after all.
    That would make it a civil suit, not a criminal one. Nothing Rand said would rule that out.

  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by cajuncocoa View Post
    we're getting thrown back to a different era here
    It's strange to me that this line would be used as an argument against something, especially on a website devoted to the ideals of a man whose whole career has been defined by his aim of returning American government to what it was in a bygone era.
    Last edited by erowe1; 08-26-2015 at 07:37 AM.

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by cajuncocoa View Post
    I'm wondering if some of the RPF members Carlybee and I were arguing with last night wouldn't be in favor of having these outed Ashley Madison members publicly stoned. Apparently Rand is much too progressive (read:libertine) for their taste.

    I'm sure witch hunting is next. While I have absolutely no use for adulterers, that's between the parties involved and their legal counsel. If they used the site on government time then as their employer they should either write them up or terminate them on a case by case basis according to their terms of employment, however it's probably a waste of time and money.

  27. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by cajuncocoa View Post
    It's so archaic to describe oral sex between consenting adults (possibly even married consenting adults) as "sodomy" in 2015 ... like I said, we're getting thrown back to a different era here, boys and girls. Yes, I am 100% for keeping the federal government out of the bedroom of consenting adults. You bet I am. I'm for smaller, less intrusive government.
    I'm fine with them staying out of it and that includes not passing laws in favor of it.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    I'm fine with them staying out of it and that includes not passing laws in favor of it.
    I'm in favor of them NOT passing laws AGAINST it. (See: Virginia, Ken Cuccinelli)

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by cajuncocoa View Post
    I'm in favor of them NOT passing laws AGAINST it. (See: Virginia, Ken Cuccinelli)
    I don't agree with what Cuccinelli did. But, I have a lot less problem with it than if it happened at the federal level. If people don't like it in Virginia, they can work to change the law or move to another state.

    By the same token, I am against the approval of gay marriage at the federal level.
    Last edited by LibertyEagle; 08-26-2015 at 07:57 AM.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  31. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Carlybee View Post
    I'm sure witch hunting is next. While I have absolutely no use for adulterers, that's between the parties involved and their legal counsel. If they used the site on government time then as their employer they should either write them up or terminate them on a case by case basis according to their terms of employment, however it's probably a waste of time and money.
    Of course I'm not making excuses for adulterers! I hope I'm not making it sound as if I am. But at the same time, it's not a crime, and I hope we've evolved beyond the days when we would drag the woman (because it was always the woman, never the man) out into the street for a public stoning.

    Even Jesus thought that was hypocritical of those who were involved in the stoning.

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    I don't agree with what Cuccinelli did. But, I have a lot less problem with it than if it happened at the federal level. If people don't like it in Virginia, they can work to change the law or move to another state.
    And then they can vote against Ken Cuccinelli when he runs for governor, too.

  33. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by cajuncocoa View Post
    Of course I'm not making excuses for adulterers! I hope I'm not making it sound as if I am. But at the same time, it's not a crime, and I hope we've evolved beyond the days when we would drag the woman (because it was always the woman, never the man) out into the street for a public stoning.

    Even Jesus thought that was hypocritical of those who were involved in the stoning.
    No, of course I don't agree with that. But, I do think the spouse could sue for breaking the marriage contract, if they so chose.

    In the past, a lot of these issues were handled by the church. In this case, the person might be thrown out as punishment for breaking God's law.
    Last edited by LibertyEagle; 08-26-2015 at 08:01 AM.
    ================
    Open Borders: A Libertarian Reappraisal or why only dumbasses and cultural marxists are for it.

    Cultural Marxism: The Corruption of America

    The Property Basis of Rights

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by LibertyEagle View Post
    No, of course I don't agree with that. But, I do think the spouse could sue for breaking the marriage contract, if they so chose.

    In the past, a lot of these issues were handled by the church. In this case, the person might be thrown out as punishment for breaking God's law.
    Yes! That's the only thing that should happen. It's a matter between the two people involved in the marriage. Period. Case closed.

    What the church does is what the church does. That's not for me to question.

Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Anonymous to spill “Ashley Madison” “DC Madam” beans on Ted Cruz before Wisconsin
    By Lucille in forum 2016 Presidential Election: GOP & Dem
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 04-02-2016, 11:33 AM
  2. Pastor Outed In Ashley Madison Hack Commits Suicide
    By Ronin Truth in forum Family, Parenting & Education
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-09-2015, 11:09 AM
  3. Ashley Madison hack exposes millions of users [updated]
    By Warrior_of_Freedom in forum Privacy & Data Security
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 08-28-2015, 01:41 PM
  4. 15,000 government emails revealed in Ashley Madison leak
    By Dianne in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-19-2015, 09:51 AM
  5. Newt Gingrich Bahaha Ashley Madison Endorses Newt Gingrich
    By Gravik in forum 2012 Presidential Election
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 12-20-2011, 11:19 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •