Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 84

Thread: The LGBT Community - Why We Should Embrace Them

  1. #1

    The LGBT Community - Why We Should Embrace Them

    http://libertyisnow.blogspot.com/201...d-embrace.html

    Everyone here in the movement call ourselves by many names such as Paleo-Conservatives, Calssical Liberals, Libertarians, and Anarcho-Capitalists but we all have some major things in common. Primarily, we believe that each person should be valued based on their own unique individual charachteristics, and no single charachteristic alone defines a person such as race, creed, gender, etc. This is why believe in free markets, because a free market is where individuals are free to be individuals and judged as such which gives us so many advantages in prosperity, but I don't write today about free markets or economics.

    While we champion individualism and detest collectivism whether it manifests itself in divisive forms such as racism and homophobia or in the supposedly uniting forms in the forms such as different group movements we feel it still promotes the same collective thinking that ignores the individual and complexity of the individual. The only way to fix this is to get people to embrace individuality, and to understand this we must educate on how collectivism causes the very things these collectivist movements are fighting against.

    So for example, an individualist would have problem with "Hate" crimes laws cause it implies that one murder is worse than another murder cause of intention, a murder in itself is a horrible offense on anyones individualism since it destroys the individual no matter what the motivation. So an individualist will criticize those who lobby government for laws to promote "equality" among groups. This institutionlizes the idea of different groups or collectives in one of the most dominant institutions in existance, Law, when most of the time much of intergroup hostility comes from collectivist thought and other Laws.

    My question is... do these critiques and judgements prove counter productive?

    I am proud to think of myself as one of the anarcho-capitalist who is doing as much as possible to reach out the LGBT community to show them how individualism leads to the tolerance and acceptance that any social movement strives for. I have even created the facebook page for The Martini Party, a group for LGBT people and advocates to coalesce around Liberty and Individualism.

    I find that lot of people in the movement choose not to reach out to the LGBT community cause they feel like other social movements they intrinisically want to go to government for every problem, but the reason they do this is quite understandable if you take a moment, let's pose a quick analogy to set the stage:

    Imagine a bunch of kids playing on the playground having a great time, the last thing they would want is mother to come in to supervise and direct playtime. A child comes and wants to play with the other kids, but whatever reason the kids will not let them play so the kid goes to mother to tell the kids to let them play. All the kid wanted was to play with everyone else, but because they didn't mothers restrictive nature was conjured.

    If we don't want the Feminist, Civil Rights, and the LGBT community to embrace government and to instead embrace individualism we need to embrace them in return. If we don't make conscious effort that we want them to come play, then mother will be continued to be asked to fix the problem. Like socialism only would work with the creation of this "new socialist man", individualism and a state-less society can only work if we build a "new individualist man" that is tolerant, creative, and adaptive without no central power. If we create this coalition by embracing these communities in an individualist way by being good friends, co-workers, and overall caring; then we can see our movement advance fowards.

    Another thing that seperates the LGBT community is that they have legitimatley been outcasted from society, especially trangendered people which has led the prostitution and drug use among the community, that wouldn't have to be the case if we just all embraced one another. Women and Racial Minorities have already got over the largest walls in the path tolerance and now only need to shed away the construct of race and gender to move foward, but the LGBT community still has many preliminary walls to get over before they can truly shed the collectivist contructs of sexuality and just be themselves, and embrace their unique and beautiful individualism. Meaning, if we want any community to shed collectivism we need to break the outer cultural collectivism that forces them into these groups and let them be individuals and part of society.


    For those who don't understand the altruistic motivations here's some political ones:

    - The LGBT community due to the level hostility they get have really built a tightly wound parallel culture, media, and world that dwarfs the kind of grassroots infrastructure our movement has, having that on our side definetley has it's merits.

    - This would be a blow to the heart of the Collectivist coalition, and be a big triumph for liberty and individualism, and a step towards world free of coercion and violence.


    I have lot more to say on this, but I think I got the main point across, in order to build our ranks we need embrace individuals, and not just passivly but activly to show them love, tolerance, and cooperation that exists in an individualist world.
    Alex Merced - A Champion of Freedom
    ------------------------------------------------------------------

    HAYEKFORUMS.COM
    - Economics and Philosophy Discussion and Debate


    ALEXMERCEDFORUMS.COM
    - Libertarian Community and Discussion


    Donate to Help Alex Merced promote Liberty Full Time


    FACEBOOK PAGES YOU SHOULD LIKE



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    If only most of them weren't liberals.

  4. #3
    The last time I embraced the LGBT community someone grabbed my ass.
    Definition of political insanity: Voting for the same people expecting different results.

  5. #4
    The TRICK is how to keep the support of the (non-Neocon) Conservatives (bigger voting group) while trying to embrace the LGBT (minority) without having the Conservatives boycotting the Liberty Movement.

    The LGBT Community is a huge liability and can destroy our chances of getting people elected.

    Something to think about.
    ----

    Ron Paul Forum's Mission Statement:

    Inspired by US Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, this site is dedicated to facilitating grassroots initiatives that aim to restore a sovereign limited constitutional Republic based on the rule of law, states' rights and individual rights. We seek to enshrine the original intent of our Founders to foster respect for private property, seek justice, provide opportunity, and to secure individual liberty for ourselves and our posterity.

  6. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by RCA View Post
    If only most of them weren't liberals.
    Statist, not Liberal.
    "Democracy, too, is a religion. It is the worship of jackals by jackasses." - H.L. Mencken

    Μολὼν λάβε

    "Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves." - William Pitt


  7. #6
    Just convince them that marriage isn't even an issue for the government to handle or regulate instead of the concepts of collective rights in the form of gay rights and straight rights.

  8. #7

    Agreed

    I sell Ron Paul to my gay friends by saying:

    Ron Paul wants the Goverment out of your bedrooom and out of your wallet.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by RCA View Post
    If only most of them weren't liberals.
    I think I explained why there liberal in the article, or at least alluded to it, cause they feel they are the only people who understand.

    As far as keeping the conservative vote, I'm not saying the people organizing and rallying the conservatives shouldn't continue doing so, but some of us need to expand the coalition.

    I'm not saying that the Campaign for Liberty itself should be pursuing this endeavor, thus why I created the martini party a seperate banner to target the left leaning people who might be sypathetic to what we got to say.
    Alex Merced - A Champion of Freedom
    ------------------------------------------------------------------

    HAYEKFORUMS.COM
    - Economics and Philosophy Discussion and Debate


    ALEXMERCEDFORUMS.COM
    - Libertarian Community and Discussion


    Donate to Help Alex Merced promote Liberty Full Time


    FACEBOOK PAGES YOU SHOULD LIKE



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by FrankRep View Post
    The TRICK is how to keep the support of the (non-Neocon) Conservatives (bigger voting group) while trying to embrace the LGBT (minority) without having the Conservatives boycotting the Liberty Movement.

    The LGBT Community is a huge liability and can destroy our chances of getting people elected.

    Something to think about.
    depends on the state, it could win us elections in CA, New York, and Connecticut and such

    and winning states like that would give us a lot of mementum
    Alex Merced - A Champion of Freedom
    ------------------------------------------------------------------

    HAYEKFORUMS.COM
    - Economics and Philosophy Discussion and Debate


    ALEXMERCEDFORUMS.COM
    - Libertarian Community and Discussion


    Donate to Help Alex Merced promote Liberty Full Time


    FACEBOOK PAGES YOU SHOULD LIKE

  12. #10
    Don't use terms like "homophobia" if you really want me to consider your idea.

  13. #11
    So for example, an individualist would have problem with "Hate" crimes laws cause it implies that one murder is worse than another murder cause of intention, a murder in itself is a horrible offense on anyones individualism since it destroys the individual no matter what the motivation. So an individualist will criticize those who lobby government for laws to promote "equality" among groups. This institutionlizes the idea of different groups or collectives in one of the most dominant institutions in existance, Law, when most of the time much of intergroup hostility comes from collectivist thought and other Laws.
    I have a problem with "hate" crimes because I should be allowed to hate anybody I want and anybody should be allowed to hate me.

    Imagine a bunch of kids playing on the playground having a great time, the last thing they would want is mother to come in to supervise and direct playtime. A child comes and wants to play with the other kids, but whatever reason the kids will not let them play so the kid goes to mother to tell the kids to let them play. All the kid wanted was to play with everyone else, but because they didn't mothers restrictive nature was conjured.

    If we don't want the Feminist, Civil Rights, and the LGBT community to embrace government and to instead embrace individualism we need to embrace them in return. If we don't make conscious effort that we want them to come play, then mother will be continued to be asked to fix the problem.
    I have no problem with the existence of social mores. Yes, liberty is the champion of the individual. However, the human is a social animal. Social mores should not be legally codified - but that does not mean that they should not exist. In your example of the nanny mom, I have no problem with kids forming and enforcing the social clicks. The nanny mom is wrong to interfere. The nanny state is wrong to interfere. The kids are not wrong to exert social pressures. Life is not Sesame Street. I think Barney is a bad influence on our country. We do not need to accept people as they are. The individual has the choice to change and fit in or to not change and stand apart.

  14. #12

  15. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugerrand View Post
    I have a problem with "hate" crimes because I should be allowed to hate anybody I want and anybody should be allowed to hate me.



    I have no problem with the existence of social mores. Yes, liberty is the champion of the individual. However, the human is a social animal. Social mores should not be legally codified - but that does not mean that they should not exist. In your example of the nanny mom, I have no problem with kids forming and enforcing the social clicks. The nanny mom is wrong to interfere. The nanny state is wrong to interfere. The kids are not wrong to exert social pressures. Life is not Sesame Street. I think Barney is a bad influence on our country. We do not need to accept people as they are. The individual has the choice to change and fit in or to not change and stand apart.
    That's not the point I'm trying to make, the point I'm trying to make is that if you don't want people clamoring for government action, methods such tolerance would actually prevent government intervention.

    The kids were in their right to reject the kid, but the kid now has used the power of central authority.

    Also, I make the statement that these group operate in collectivist means cause the society outside of them judges them by collectivist means. We can condemn both, but we can't rid of either until you get rid of the other side forcing the other to be where they are in a sense.

    Until you get people to be more tolerant of gays, the less gays will ever embrace individualism cause, cause why would they if they are pidgeonhold into a group.


    I'm just saying this is more complex, and if we're going to break the cycle we need to look at this more critically that just saying "tough $#@!"
    Alex Merced - A Champion of Freedom
    ------------------------------------------------------------------

    HAYEKFORUMS.COM
    - Economics and Philosophy Discussion and Debate


    ALEXMERCEDFORUMS.COM
    - Libertarian Community and Discussion


    Donate to Help Alex Merced promote Liberty Full Time


    FACEBOOK PAGES YOU SHOULD LIKE

  16. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugerrand View Post
    I have a problem with "hate" crimes because I should be allowed to hate anybody I want and anybody should be allowed to hate me.



    I have no problem with the existence of social mores. Yes, liberty is the champion of the individual. However, the human is a social animal. Social mores should not be legally codified - but that does not mean that they should not exist. In your example of the nanny mom, I have no problem with kids forming and enforcing the social clicks. The nanny mom is wrong to interfere. The nanny state is wrong to interfere. The kids are not wrong to exert social pressures. Life is not Sesame Street. I think Barney is a bad influence on our country. We do not need to accept people as they are. The individual has the choice to change and fit in or to not change and stand apart.
    I agree we shouldn't have to like or tolerate other individuals, but soon as we ackowledge groups by judging them... we have become the collectivist we're fighting against.
    Alex Merced - A Champion of Freedom
    ------------------------------------------------------------------

    HAYEKFORUMS.COM
    - Economics and Philosophy Discussion and Debate


    ALEXMERCEDFORUMS.COM
    - Libertarian Community and Discussion


    Donate to Help Alex Merced promote Liberty Full Time


    FACEBOOK PAGES YOU SHOULD LIKE

  17. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by AlexMerced View Post
    depends on the state, it could win us elections in CA, New York, and Connecticut and such

    and winning states like that would give us a lot of mementum
    There needs to be two factions of the Libertarian Party:
    The Liberal Libertarians and the Conservative Libertarians.
    ----

    Ron Paul Forum's Mission Statement:

    Inspired by US Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, this site is dedicated to facilitating grassroots initiatives that aim to restore a sovereign limited constitutional Republic based on the rule of law, states' rights and individual rights. We seek to enshrine the original intent of our Founders to foster respect for private property, seek justice, provide opportunity, and to secure individual liberty for ourselves and our posterity.

  18. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by FrankRep View Post
    There needs to be two factions of the Libertarian Party:
    The Liberal Libertarians and the Conservative Libertarians.
    I agree with that
    Alex Merced - A Champion of Freedom
    ------------------------------------------------------------------

    HAYEKFORUMS.COM
    - Economics and Philosophy Discussion and Debate


    ALEXMERCEDFORUMS.COM
    - Libertarian Community and Discussion


    Donate to Help Alex Merced promote Liberty Full Time


    FACEBOOK PAGES YOU SHOULD LIKE



  19. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  20. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by AlexMerced View Post
    That's not the point I'm trying to make, the point I'm trying to make is that if you don't want people clamoring for government action, methods such tolerance would actually prevent government intervention.

    The kids were in their right to reject the kid, but the kid now has used the power of central authority.

    Also, I make the statement that these group operate in collectivist means cause the society outside of them judges them by collectivist means. We can condemn both, but we can't rid of either until you get rid of the other side forcing the other to be where they are in a sense.

    Until you get people to be more tolerant of gays, the less gays will ever embrace individualism cause, cause why would they if they are pidgeonhold into a group.


    I'm just saying this is more complex, and if we're going to break the cycle we need to look at this more critically that just saying "tough $#@!"
    This strikes me as Group A wants Group B to make Change C. If Group B does not comply then Group A will use Force D. So, the way to prevent Force D is for Group B to make Change C.

    But, what if Group B does not want to make Change C? Your way of looking at this more critically is to say "tough s..." to Group B.

  21. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by FrankRep View Post
    There needs to be two factions of the Libertarian Party:
    The Liberal Libertarians and the Conservative Libertarians.

    Perhaps...but I'd wager that there's quite a bit of overlap between the two.

    OP, i agree with you. Then again, i never understood hating people based on race, sex, religion, or sexual orientation, or what food they like or dislike...it seems so pointless. The government can't force people to accept others, but when you have a group that feels continually marginalized, that's what will happen.

  22. #19
    well this scenario is inevitable as long as there is a government for somebody to use coerce the unyielding party, which is why I advocate anarcho-capitalism.

    I'm just talking about how to expand our coalition so we can win 2012
    Alex Merced - A Champion of Freedom
    ------------------------------------------------------------------

    HAYEKFORUMS.COM
    - Economics and Philosophy Discussion and Debate


    ALEXMERCEDFORUMS.COM
    - Libertarian Community and Discussion


    Donate to Help Alex Merced promote Liberty Full Time


    FACEBOOK PAGES YOU SHOULD LIKE

  23. #20
    it really does depend on the state. for example, i know that it would work in san francisco, but not in texas. i think that the one message of unity includes everyone, not just whites and conservatives. everyone including hispanics, blacks, whites, asians, and lgbt are included.

    people should be more tolerant but i don't think it should be an issue that one would run on for the presidential election. it is more a district to district issue.
    Tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito

  24. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Krugerrand View Post
    I have a problem with "hate" crimes because I should be allowed to hate anybody I want and anybody should be allowed to hate me.



    I have no problem with the existence of social mores. Yes, liberty is the champion of the individual. However, the human is a social animal. Social mores should not be legally codified - but that does not mean that they should not exist. In your example of the nanny mom, I have no problem with kids forming and enforcing the social clicks. The nanny mom is wrong to interfere. The nanny state is wrong to interfere. The kids are not wrong to exert social pressures. Life is not Sesame Street. I think Barney is a bad influence on our country. We do not need to accept people as they are. The individual has the choice to change and fit in or to not change and stand apart.
    While I think you have some good perspectives, I think you may be confusing value judgments with rights. IOW just because choosing something is a right does not mean that the choice will necessarily be “not wrong”. IOW claiming something should not be illegal is one thing; saying it’s “not wrong” is another.

  25. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by silentshout View Post
    Perhaps...but I'd wager that there's quite a bit of overlap between the two.

    OP, i agree with you. Then again, i never understood hating people based on race, sex, religion, or sexual orientation, or what food they like or dislike...it seems so pointless. The government can't force people to accept others, but when you have a group that feels continually marginalized, that's what will happen.
    You don't have to hate someone to oppose their decisions and as a result prefer not to be around them. We should all tolerate, but we shouldn't accept what we don't agree with.

  26. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by idirtify View Post
    While I think you have some good perspectives, I think you may be confusing value judgments with rights. IOW just because choosing something is a right does not mean that the choice will necessarily be “not wrong”. IOW claiming something should not be illegal is one thing; saying it’s “not wrong” is another.
    valid point. I'd only clarify to "may not be wrong" instead of "are not wrong."

  27. #24
    __________________________________________________ ________________
    "A politician will do almost anything to keep their job, even become a patriot" - Hearst



  28. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  29. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by libertybrewcity View Post
    it really does depend on the state. for example, i know that it would work in san francisco, but not in texas. i think that the one message of unity includes everyone, not just whites and conservatives. everyone including hispanics, blacks, whites, asians, and lgbt are included.

    people should be more tolerant but i don't think it should be an issue that one would run on for the presidential election. it is more a district to district issue.
    Yeah, I'm not saying be tolerant as a campaign issue, I'm just saying if we're more tolerant in our daily lives, people will feel less need to run to government for everything.
    Alex Merced - A Champion of Freedom
    ------------------------------------------------------------------

    HAYEKFORUMS.COM
    - Economics and Philosophy Discussion and Debate


    ALEXMERCEDFORUMS.COM
    - Libertarian Community and Discussion


    Donate to Help Alex Merced promote Liberty Full Time


    FACEBOOK PAGES YOU SHOULD LIKE

  30. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by AlexMerced View Post
    Yeah, I'm not saying be tolerant as a campaign issue, I'm just saying if we're more tolerant in our daily lives, people will feel less need to run to government for everything.
    It would make things easier, that's for sure.

  31. #27
    Yep, there simple things we can to reduce government intervention by being more conscious of the things we do that might inflame the calls for government action, for us to preserve liberty we need to take responsibility over our own actions.
    Alex Merced - A Champion of Freedom
    ------------------------------------------------------------------

    HAYEKFORUMS.COM
    - Economics and Philosophy Discussion and Debate


    ALEXMERCEDFORUMS.COM
    - Libertarian Community and Discussion


    Donate to Help Alex Merced promote Liberty Full Time


    FACEBOOK PAGES YOU SHOULD LIKE

  32. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by AlexMerced View Post
    Yep, there simple things we can to reduce government intervention by being more conscious of the things we do that might inflame the calls for government action, for us to preserve liberty we need to take responsibility over our own actions.
    Good point. It reveals what may end up becoming the primary “morality”; in which the main incentive for “doing the right thing” (or not doing the wrong thing) is not for love or charity or karma or religion or ethics, but for fear of government involvement.

  33. #29
    I don't know if we should necessarily "embrace" the community, but we should for sure "speak" to the community... same with the pro-ganja community, speak to them as well, but maybe not "embrace" them...

    I don't like labeling groups etc..., but speaking and teaching our message to gay pot smokers could be very beneficial because, and I may be wrong, it doesn't seem to me that the two work together trying to get their issues solved... embedding our message in a, no pun intended, bi-issue community could help the message more easily be spread to both of these groups, which I see as big "in the pocket" votes for progressives...

    The more "freedom" and "liberty" based issues we make these two groups aware of, the more likely they are to see that the politicians they traditionally vote for are the problem, not the solution...

  34. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by FrankRep View Post
    The TRICK is how to keep the support of the (non-Neocon) Conservatives (bigger voting group) while trying to embrace the LGBT (minority) without having the Conservatives boycotting the Liberty Movement.

    The LGBT Community is a huge liability and can destroy our chances of getting people elected.

    Something to think about.
    Just keep the message alive, and everyone speak to those you know. I never understood the pandering thing; it's what the other folks do, and that's why their "message" is really just pointless, empty sloganeering.
    Genuine, willful, aggressive ignorance is the one sure way to tick me off. I wish I could say you were trolling. I know better, and it's just sad.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. LGBT School K-12
    By Danke in forum Family, Parenting & Education
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 01-30-2016, 08:21 PM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-07-2012, 04:13 PM
  3. What's your position on "embracing" the LGBT community?
    By low preference guy in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-08-2010, 11:39 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
  •