So your argument is that they opposed it without comment?
My argument is that their comments were not the ones you alleged.
I've sent you 2 essays and you ignored 99% of the words. I am certain, after this experience, sending another quote would do neither of us any good.
In some other dimension, I send you a quote and you will say the speaker is not libertarian enough.
Things like this happen when people are not genuine.
In this case under current examination, for example, It is already certain you believe LP can somehow stand in opposition to something without even making a public comment.
You don't even believe this. Of course you are well aware there exists public statements from the LP party on this about why they voted NO. But it is a game you play because you lack the intellectual honestly to figure I was right. The LP stood against the proposition for the reasons already cited, and that, for some reason, makes you sad and defensive. Denial and intellectual dishonesty.
I've sent you 2 essays and you ignored 99% of the words.
And neither of them said, "chicken farms have a right to torture chickens in the most inhumane ways and corporations have a right to hide from the public what food is gmo or not."
You have this weird statist notion that rights are things granted to people by government; that anything the government doesn't make illegal is a right. That's not how rights work. Rights are things you have whether the government recognizes them or not.
If the US were to repeal the Second Amendment tomorrow that wouldn't mean Americans no longer had the right to keep and bear arms, it would just mean their government doesn't recognize their right to do so. There's a big difference between not having a right and having a government that doesn't recognize that right, or worse, penalizes citizens for exercising such rights.
I don't think you can find any widespread support among libertarians for the notion that people have a right to torture animals.
In this case under current examination, for example, It is already certain you believe LP can somehow stand in opposition to something without even making a public comment.
I made no such claim. This is purely an invention of your own mind. This is typical leftist argument technique. When you can't argue something on its merits, just misrepresent your opponent's argument and attack the misrepresentation
I simply asked you to support the claim that a "typical" libertarian argues that there exists a right to "torture chickens in the most inhumane ways," and you continue to obfuscate and deflect rather than address the question.
(post is archived)