Comment Re:So your point then... (Score 1) 105
So let me get this "straight": are you advocating pure amorality as the only means of escaping a kind of "we will enforce what we want to enforce" moral singularity?
My point, in spite of your creative attempts to obfuscate it, is that you are still encouraging political cherry-picking through the laws of the land. You are claiming the moral high ground - which is not a new position for you to claim to own, of course - and telling us that everyone else is wrong because they subscribe to a different take on "morality" from your favorite.
It may shock you, but I'm quite content to view the federal Constitution through a purely libertarian lens.
What would shock me would be if your "libertarian lens" actually lead to an increase in actual liberty for more than
and we should offload the non-Enumerated, Progressive aspects of our Federal government.
You mean like dictating to people who they can love, or our Federal roles of international nation-building?
However, it's highly doubtful that you have the intellectual fortitude
Does the moral high ground automatically require you to insult me rather than have an actual discussion of the topic?