In response to:

Libertarians' Awkward Bedfellows

Anonymous908 Wrote: Feb 27, 2013 7:10 PM
A little juicy bit of info: The original intent of marriage licences granted by the government was meant to keep black and white people from marrying. I support taking government completely out of the equation. Since marriage was originally a religious union, let all churches make their own policies and let them be in charge of officially marrying people. If a church won't marry you and your loved one, you can choose a different church. We all know, that it doesn't matter whether the government recognizes it or not, gay people will still be gay together and still have gay sex. Just like it doesn't matter if government prohibited all drugs, people will still use them.
Anonymous908 Wrote: Feb 27, 2013 7:14 PM
We need to understand that just because something is prohibited or condoned by the government, it doesn't mean the people will change their ways. Gun control doesn't make us safer (I argue is makes us less safe). Drug prohibition doesn't eliminate drugs, addiction, or drug cartels (I argue it worsens all of these). Prohibit gay sex/marriage and it just might happen even more.
Paulus Textor Wrote: Feb 27, 2013 7:22 PM
Anonymous908 speaks the truth. Government control of guns, marriage, drugs all springs from the same fundamentally-flawed thinking. Government should regulate none of these.

Last week, Conservative pundit Ann Coulter told me and a thousand young libertarians that we libertarians are puss- -- well, she used slang for a female body part.

We were in Washington, D.C., at the Students for Liberty conference, taping my TV show, and she didn't like my questions about her opposition to gay marriage and drug legalization.

"We're living in a country that is 70 percent socialist," she says. "The government takes 60 percent of your money. They take care of your health care, your pensions ... who you can hire ... and you (libertarians) want to suck up to...