Arguing on Facebook

I often feel like I'm always trying to defend the opposing side. Left leaning people love when I criticize Republicans and conservatives love when I criticize Democrats. I don't belong to any one side. There are often things I agree with from a conservative stance and often things I agree with from a more liberal stance. Doesn't mean I "belong" or identify with the left or right. My conservative friends like to call me a liberal every once in a while, and I'm sure my liberal friends think I'm a right wing nut job in sheep's clothing. That's the thing about being a libertarian. We've been called all of these things sometimes in the same day. If you truly want to know what I identify mostly with, google "classical liberal"

But back to my major point. If it seems like I am taking the opposing view just for the sake of a good argument, you may want to think again. I actually loathe arguing (No comment from close friends, please). I don't mind a friendly political debate, but doing so on Facebook is less than ideal because when you're the only one with the opposing view, it can feel like you're being attacked by everyone else. I know people hate to discuss politics on Facebook because "no one is changing anyone's mind."

I disagree with that statement.

If what someone says to you can influence the way you have thought about something, I would call that productive. It's not about changing ideas, it's about influencing people to change the way they think about something. Those are two completely different things. I have often said that I encourage and welcome opposing viewpoints. I NEVER want to seem that I am superior to anyone, and if I ever come across as condescending in my rebuttals, please let me know, because it was not intention. If you can present a clear and concise argument of why you think you are right and someone is wrong, the other person doesn't have to like what you say, but having mutual respect goes a long way.

I will openly say that I don't like to engage in debate with certain people because they approach debate with a personal interest. The second you take something personal when it's intent was not meant to be personal, your argument takes on entirely too much emotion. I've been guilty of this for sure, and have found myself angry with someone who I cared for.

We are humans, and emotions are going to take place in discourse, even if we try to leave emotions at home with us.

So, the next time you find yourself in a heated discussion on Facebook, relax, breathe, realize it's just a debate, make your point, and move on.

Dealing with tragedies

After the most recent shooting in which a gunman took down nearly 50 people at Pulse in Orlando, Fla., a gay nightclub, almost immediately people began calling for gun control. It's a predictable thing that happens after almost any mass shooting in the last couple years. Unfortunately, this has happened, and I don't think almost anyone wants these kinds of things to happen. Unless you're Westboro Baptist Church.

There are lots of emotions that people deal with after anything this terrible happens. Even locally, there were at least two known to be victims of this massacre. Makes you realize what a small, scary world we live in. No one should have to live in fear. I mean no one. I don't care what your personal feelings are about any one particular person or what their sexual orientation is. That's not being

debated here nor should it be debated in a tragedy like this. What is being debated of course after any mass shooting is the need and want for gun control. We've been down this road far too many times. And the end conclusion is always the same. Legislation can be introduced of course, but passing it is another. And when and if this legislation is passed, what's going to happen when this legislation doesn't work? What then? Are we going to hear cries from people to ban all guns or any kind of weapon that some people may feel can used for deadly purposes?

There is also a catch word going around through the media and across social media that is being misused and that is 'assault weapon' or 'automatic' weapon. Both of those words to describe weapons are used incorrectly. Mind you, I am not a gun connoisseur, nor do I own a gun, but I have common sense and I know how to look things up. Something that apparently gun control advocates who are playing off people's emotions (which by the way is disgusting), are currently doing. Assault weapon simply describes the aesthetics of a gun, and has nothing to do with the operation of the gun. There is nothing operationally different between an assault rifle and a hunting rifle that my brother uses to hunt deer in the fall.

I've also heard A LOT of people say that "no one needs a weapon like that." The purpose of the Second Amendment was for self-defense. and to keep the government in check. If you're waiting on the government to protect you or for police to arrive on the scene, you will probably already be dead. It's a harsh understanding and one of the biggest reasons why I am a supporter for people to defend themselves. I want to live in a world where gay couples won't be afraid to hold hands in public, and certainly not when they are out having fun. I just wish someone there would have been equipped to deal with that situation. Can you imagine if the gunman had been taken out by an off-duty police officer who used his gun to stop 50 people from being killed? I want that to be a reality. Gun-free zones are extremely dangerous, and are targets for people like Omar Mateen. They don't follow rules. They never will. Regardless of the fact that he was on an FBI watch list, he was still able to purchase a gun legally because we live in a democracy, and the government can't watch every citizen 24 hours a day, even though they try very hard to.

I wish that we could keep guns out of every single bad person's hands, or every person that is "on edge" but it would be nearly impossible. Stripping away the rights, whether that be Second Amendment or Fourth Amendment, of a law abiding citizen is wrong. Playing on people's emotions after a national tragedy because you think more government legislation is going to solve a complex problem, is incredibly stupid and irresponsible. I don't want to live in a country that does this.

These are tough times. Let's love one another. Teach acceptance. Learn about diversity of different religions, sexual orientations, backgrounds, etc. Use this as a teaching tool for those who don't understand. Raise awareness for LGBT issues. Practice kindness. Let's not create more political divide in this country.

Because frankly, this is exactly what's happening.

Bathroom bosses

I don't know why I felt compelled to write about this apparent touchy and controversial subject, but what the hell you know? Not like I'm scared to share my opinion with anyone (Even if they don't ask for it). So here goes.

HB2, known as House Bill 2, has been the hot button issue not just in North Carolina, but has sparked a national debate across the nation. NC has become the butt of many jokes and many businesses and performers have took a stand against HB2. I'm not here to tell you how you should feel about the bill. I know my personal feelings and if you know me you probably know these feelings. From an economic standpoint, Governor McCrory should be ashamed of the backlash against our beautiful state. We are not a red or a blue state and I've always appreciated that about my home state. But this bill does more harm than good, and I'm sorry if you don't feel that way. You are no more safer in bathrooms or public places today than you were 10 years ago. Men are not going to suddenly decide, "hey I feel like a woman today and I'm going to start using the women's restroom."

That's not exactly how this works. Cue this GIF

Transgender people are not new in our society. And I hear a lot of people say that their "lifestyle" is being forced upon us. Their "lifestyle" is no more a choice as the color of your eyes. Like it or not. Their issues and social acceptance was and is often shamed and told that they're not "normal." Whatever normal is. I sure as hell don't know. 

Trans people just want to be loved and accepted and not told where they HAVE to freaking take a leak. And government (like always) has no damn business telling people where they have to pee. I'm a big proponent of local government, and while I didn't personally have a problem with Charlotte's ordinance, even there I thought they should leave well enough alone, but giving trans people the right to use whatever bathroom facility they identify with is not asking a whole lot. Whether we realize it or not, LGBT rights matter. It has become too political in my opinion, but no one should be allowed to fire someone because they are LGBT. That's asinine. 

Often laws are overreaching and I believe the free markets and private businesses should be allowed to operate as they want. There's a reason why successful, large companies are LGBT allies. It's suicidal to be against. I think there's a way we can simultaneously have our religious liberties protected and not discriminate against people. I truly do. 

Senator Jeff Jackson said it best in my opinion: "Whether you are for or against HB2, know that its purpose was to turn us against each other. And it's working like a charm."

We can do better than this, North Carolina. 

Assigned politics?

I far too often hear that one has to vote a certain way if they are a particular race, gender, sexual orientation, Because this politician votes in favor of your rights, or democrats actually "care" about your rights, or of course they give the allusion that they care. And of course no one in the GOP cares about women, people of color or gay people, right? 

Well they may be half right, but they're also wrong. 

If you honestly think that Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton care more about your rights than say any other politician, you're living in a fantasy world. They simply want your votes. Hillary panders (like everyone else of course) to the gay community, black community, and anyone else she thinks will vote for her. 

Most people aren't single issue voters, but there are many who are. And the reason I know this is because most ignore Hillary Clinton's voting record, and focus on the fact that she's suddenly a champion for LBGT rights (looking at you Human Rights Campaign), even though she was for the traditional definition of marriage not so long ago. People seem to forget that. 

I've heard a lot of people say how bad the candidates are this election cycle, but 9 out of 10 of those people will end up voting for one of those people they don't like. Something that blows my mind. If you accept the status quo as is, it will never change. The American people are voting for what they want, or are they? Do people really want Donald Trump to be President? I'm sure some out there genuinely like the guy and he is their first choice, and although I disagree with them, it is their vote and their opinion. 

I'm implore you to not accept the lesser of two evils. If you don't like Hillary or Trump, by God don't vote for either! It is completely okay to vote for the third party or to leave the ballot blank. To me personally, a blank ballot option sends a message. It says, my choices are not to my liking, and I would rather vote for a tree stump. And do NOT let anyone tell you it's a wasted vote. Principles are a quality that is dying and is great to have. Most people do not have them. If they did, they wouldn't always vote one way. 

Don't let anyone tell you that you have to vote a certain way just because of who you are. I don't care where you grew up, or who your parents are, or if you go to church or don't go to church, if you're gay or straight, black or Hispanic, etc. You vote the way your principles tell you to vote. It's the best advice I can offer someone. 

So as you go to the polls this year (or today in NC), please keep these words of advice somewhere in the corner of your mind. 

Remember, it's the best advice I can offer. 

Mainstream libertarian-ism common grounds

Kate Hudson was on The View this morning, and the reason I bring this up (besides admitting to the fact that I watch The View), is because she mentioned the fact that her father, Bill Hudson, was a libertarian and her mother, well known actress, Goldie Hawn, was about the complete opposite. I'm assuming extremely liberal. My point of this post is to not praise the fact that Bill Hudson is a libertarian, but to point out the fact that the word libertarian is becoming a more commonly used word in the mainstream media and talk shows.

A few years ago, people would read the word libertarian and mistake it for librarian, or they wouldn't know what a libertarian was at all. Kate also made a good point about how even though growing up in her house was "different," it teaches us a good lesson about two people being friends or even spouses, but having completely different political ideologies. It is possible. I have facebook friends who I'm fairly certain only associate with people who think exactly like them.

Sad if you think about it. No one ever challenges your viewpoint, or brings up a side of an argument they would never consider. I appreciate my varying friends political views. Even if I know they're wrong ;-).

Kidding of course. But you get my point, right?

I also posted a link to an article earlier this week about Justice Antonin Scalia and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and discussing their close friendship even though they voted and dissented very differently and were almost complete polar opposites on the political spectrum. They may not have agreed, but politics as a whole is mostly a discussion. It doesn't mean you can't get along with someone you don't agree with, or that has different political leanings. That teaches us all a very valuable lesson in American politics, especially today as we are so politically divided as a nation.

So whether you're a libertarian, liberal, social conservative, anarchist, or Green Party member, we should all be able to get along. 

Let's talk about race

Most of what I write here is straight from the heart, and I am usually apologetically honest, even when it's not the popular thing to say. But how does a white man talk about race without it blowing back up in his face? We are in some ways (and many will argue with me on this) the "privileged" race and sex, so that's two strikes against me. How does one engage in an open dialogue with anyone if they are white and male? I've been told before that I just don't understand and to be silent, because I was (as if I was around) the oppressor for so many years. Yes, my fellow white men (and women) were oppressors and they did terrible things to people of color. A long time ago. No one alive today remembers anything about slavery except what we hear from older generations (the stories they were told by older people) and from what we read in our history books, etc. I know people of color today in a lot of ways still feel oppressed, whether it's by society, law enforcement, political leaders, etc. Do I feel that oppression is a problem? Absolutely. You'd be a fool to think it was not. But I see a world that is open and ripe for the taking regardless of your background. Accepting personally responsibilities and not blaming the world for your problems, no matter how big is a step toward maturity.

I know that racism still exists. And it's still a prevalent part of our society, unfortunately. It will always be to a certain extent. Race has been brought to the forefront the last handful of years. With the #BlackLivesMatter movement, racial justice has been a leading discussion among people. Beyonce has caught some heat for her Super Bowl 50 halftime performance, which she performed her new single "Formation," which highlights the Black Lives Matter movement. and her backup dancers were dressed as an homage to the Black Panther Party of the 1960s. I will personally say that, I like Beyonce, and I like her new music video, and I respect an artist's freedom of expression. But, I think maybe the Black Panther Party, which advocated violence to overcome black struggles, might have been done in poor taste.

But hey, it's Beyonce and she can pretty much do what she wants. I think most people will forget about it, and buy her new album and attend her concerts.

I recognize the significance of racial injustice, and know there's still more work to be done. As a libertarian, I recognize the decriminalization of harmful drug laws most affects the African American community. These are steps we can take to keep non-violent offenders out of prison, which often times tend to be African American males. It's a problem that is bipartisan, and I think we're headed in the right direction.

It's important to listen to your neighbor, even if your neighbor isn't like you. Something that isn't an issue to you, might be a very important one to your black, Latino, gay, elderly, transgender, female, etc. neighbor. I am for the individual. I re-posted a picture on Facebook the other day that read, "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." This speaks volumes in my opinion. Because most who claim to be for minority rights don't typically care about the individuals rights at all. But that's for another article I suppose.

My biggest question is what can I do to help? The only way I know to help is to treat everyone I meet with kindness and respect. Something I was raised to do. I'm not much on protesting or attending rallies, or even arguing with anyone that disagrees with me. As a white person, I believe I can still recognize and acknowledge these issues, without feeling any "white guilt." I am only an individual and I only represent myself. I don't represent all white people or all men. I only can speak for myself and myself only. And I suppose you can relate.

Post Iowa Caucus thoughts

There are two major things that I took away from the Iowa Caucus results. Number one, the only candidate that I wanted to support dropped out of the Presidential race Wednesday morning. Of course I'm speaking of Rand Paul. It was probably the right decision for him as he's done everything possible to try and relate to every voting base possible. His campaign had took a great turn earlier this week, but only receiving 4.5% of the vote in Iowa was enough for him to suspend his campaign. Rand is needed in the senate, and he will continue to fight for liberty and government overreach. I'm grateful for this. This country is clearly not ready for a libertarian president. I'll never figure out why. Establishment republicans clearly want to elect someone who doesn't have what it takes to beat Hillary in November. 

GOP Results: (Source: AP)

100% reporting	Delegates	Vote %
Cruz (won)	8	27.6%
Trump	7	24.3%
Rubio	7	23.1%
Carson	3	9.3%
Paul	1	4.5%
Bush	1	2.8%
Fiorina	1	1.9%
Kasich	1	1.9%
Huckabee	0	1.8%
Christie	0	1.8%
Santorum	0	1%
Gilmore	0	0%

And number two: Judging by the post-caucus speeches, it appears nobody really lost. Even when they did. Hillary Clinton narrowly won by a coin toss, which technically is not accurate, but she did in fact win 6 precincts by a coin flip, but it's not why she edged out Bernie Sanders. She was very fortunate to win that is for sure. The Iowa Caucus is a strange happening in American politics. Almost like a sporting event in which a winner can be determined in part because of.... a coin toss. 

Democratic Results: (Source: AP)

100% reporting	Delegates	Vote %
Clinton (won)	23	49.9%
Sanders	21	49.6%
O'Malley	0	0.6%

This has been and will continue to be a very interesting presidential race. I don't feel like there is a clear winner, especially on the republican side. Bernie Sanders has made it interesting and is definitely making Hillary sweat. He has a lot of supporters, (And most, if not all could use a basic economics lesson) but I'm certain those supporters will jump ship to team Hillary if she wins the nomination, even though they seem to be against one another at the moment. 

I'm not certain at all what will happen on the GOP side. I'm still not convinced Trump will win the nomination, and I personally don't think it will end up being him. Just don't ask me if it's going to be Ted Cruz or Marco Rubio. 

As a libertarian, my attention most likely turns to a Libertarian Party candidate. Sighs.... Maybe 2020 is a possibility, libertarians? Don't give up the good fight. The libertarian message is becoming more common and I hope people are starting to take notice.