A Battle For Control Of the Libertarian Party


Secular Libertarians vs Christian Libertarians

  In the midst of an explosion of interest in the Oklahoma Libertarian Party, there is a struggle beginning to take shape.. Several secular Libertarians are becoming very concerned that an insurgency of the Religious Right may overtake their ranks and corrupt their political party & movement.
  Ironically, the more secular Libertarians of Oklahoma lately have been expressing far more concern about the Christian population joining their membership than other faiths, particularly the Muslim demographic. While Muslim orthodoxy seems far more intolerant of religious diversity. It leads some to believe the real concern is for maintaining power and control of  the party structure and platform message?
  In a previous post, we discussed the ideas of some which expressly urged “Liberty Republicans”, particularly of the “Religious Right”; to stay away. Some ‘Liberty Republicans’ have even characterized this overture as blatantly rude. For this reason we are attempting to familiarize readers to the terms; Christian Libertarian & Secular Libertarian. We will begin this study with a trip to Wikipedia

The following is a repost from Wikipedia…

  According to Andrew Sandlin, an American theologian and author, Christian libertarianism is the view that mature individuals are permitted maximum freedom under God’s law.Alex Barron, an American blogger and podcast host, states that Christian libertarianism can be summed up like this: “I am as libertarian as my Christian faith allows.”

  Christian (including OrthodoxProtestant, and Roman Catholic) libertarians are people who believe in maximum liberty for individuals, but recognize there are universal and objective moral truths, such as “murder is wrong.” For Christian libertarians, an understanding and appreciation of these moral absolutes is formed in large part by their Christian faith. Christians in this school of political thought tend to describe such basic directives in terms of natural law or natural rights, or the law that “well formed” humans seem to come to on their own. The concept of maximum economic and political liberty under the limits of natural law as understood by theologically conservative Christianity is what forms the basis of Christian libertarian philosophy. The ideas of Christian faith and libertarian political and economic theory are somewhat in contention, but Christian libertarians are constantly trying to balance their desire for minimal involvement by the state in the affairs of individuals, and limits to behavior from Christian moral teaching.


In keeping with the fundamentals of libertarianism, laws of the state should be kept to the bare minimum. Acts that merely annoy others or slowly degrade their health might be dealt with at the local level, where the least amount of effort is needed to initiate or oppose change.
  There is great concern that even in relatively free societies, laws and regulations are becoming increasingly numerous, irrelevant, and too complex for the average person to understand. While those on the Christian right may wish to outlaw what they see as immoral, this only makes the public more accustomed to having to deal with new laws. Thus, it “opens the floodgates” for social liberalsprogressives, and non-libertarian secularists to pass their own laws when they are in control of the government, rather than having an aversion to all new laws.  Differences with Christian right:
As Jesus did not call upon the political and legal authorities to enforce piety or discourage sinful behavior, Christian libertarians do not believe in a political mandate to Christianize culture. Behavior considered sinful by the Church—but which does not violate the livesliberty, or property of others—must be disciplined within the Church itself. (This includes family discipline in the case of minor children.) Even if such behavior warrants cultural opposition amongst the general public, it must not be prohibited by the state. Only actions which legitimately constitute various forms of physical assault, tangible theft (including destruction/desecration), or fraudulent schemes may be criminalized and prosecuted, as these alone infringe upon the natural rights of others.
Due to the large taxpayer expense to house nonviolent offenders, and immoral “prison culture,” Christian libertarians generally maintain that only violent criminals and those who have demonstrated a willingness to transgress the natural rights of their neighbors should be quarantined from society and incarcerated. On an international scale, non-interventionism is promoted based upon the principles of state sovereignty and self-determination. The right of people to immigrate (without public assistance) is fully supported, as is free trade.

  While there may be a need for policeprosecutors, and prisons to uphold natural rights, these should not be so numerous and costly to enforce laws beyond natural rights. This becomes a burden for taxpayers, and affects churchgoers ability to give to their local church and support missions. The prohibition of drugs, for example, takes away funds from the church and gives them to the state, while greatly increasing violence due to the illicit drug trade. While drug abuse is considered immoral, it is within the realm of the church, and not the state. In addition, libertarians do not support civil asset forfeiture, as it can easily affect the innocent with very limited due process and costly legal fees.
  Advocating legalization of what is sinful can put Christians in a difficult position. There is always the concern non-believers may misinterpret that whatever is being legalized is now permissible. While many on the Christian right believe that God still judges nations, Christian libertarians find no basis for this in the New Testament. Both agree nations were judged in Old Testament times, but is a matter of contention whether it applies to the present day. Inevitably, the Christian right becomes alarmed when moral laws are abandoned, as they feel their nation will suffer. Christian libertarians, on the other hand, believe that under the New Covenant, God judges only individuals. Nations become prosperous when they uphold and enforce the natural rights of the people. Maximum freedom from state interference must be preserved, and laws for the sole sake of morality need not exist.


  Differences with Christian left:
  Unlike the versions of socialism or welfare statism traditionally favored by the Christian left, libertarians generally see no need for government-provided social services. These activities are best entrusted to private nonprofit organizations, which include churches and faith-based charities. This does not mean libertarians want to see governmental services shut down overnight, but, rather, phased out as soon as possible when nonprofits become capable of doing this work. Voluntary giving is more just and efficient than forced redistribution of wealth through taxation – as whatever is taxed, less of it will be produced. Christian libertarians believe public welfare is an ineffective means to lift the financially struggling out of poverty. This carries with it negative unintended consequences, such as people being less willing to obtain higher education or employment, or having more children than they would otherwise. Saving money beyond token amounts is often prohibited for those on public assistance, leading to unwise financial habits.
  School choice including parochial schools for primary and secondary education is advocated over mandated government-run schools at taxpayer expense. The spontaneous order of the free marketplace is always preferable to central planning. Over-regulation of business reduces productivity and increases unemployment, while enabling new possible avenues of corruption. Similarly, minimum wage laws hurt younger, less qualified workers, and cause price hikes even on the poor. Free individuals are in a much better position to rationally pursue their own interests than those who are being dictated to by a strong-armed central government. The state should not prohibit unwise personal, financial, or medical decisions, nor prosecute those who encourage them (short of fraud), as this is within the realm of the church.

Other differences include the support of the individual right to keep and bear arms for defense. Being wealthy is not a problem for Christian libertarians. Only the love of money (not money in itself) is considered a sin.  
With respect to environmental concerns, libertarians largely view regulatory policies and the politicization of Creation Care as only superficially “green” and essentially corporatist. Often, they cite the large-scale pollution and environmental degradation caused by governments as a reason to minimize the activities and role of the state in society (see alsogreen libertarianism and free-market environmentalism).
Christian libertarians are generally opposed to relatively free countries relinquishing their sovereignty to international governing bodies such as the United Nations, as many in the movement believe this paves the way for authoritarian world governmentInternationalism is perceived as a threat to free speech and expressionfreedom of religionself-defense rightsright to a fair trial, and the like. Among dispensationalist Protestants, this trend of political and economic centralization on a global scale tends to be cast in eschatological terms with connections being drawn to “the Beast” described in the Book of Revelation.


Differences with secular libertarianism
 Arguably the greatest difference between Christian and secular libertarians concerns those who are not only libertarian, but also libertine—that is, they want to do the very things in which Christianity forbids. For example, many Christian libertarians believe it is immoral to engage in recreational drug use, but also immoral to forcibly prevent others from doing so. On the other hand, a non-believer may espouse libertarian ideals so they need not fear such laws Christians have no intention of violating. Christians have to uphold Jesus’ command of “love your neighbor as yourself,” while non-believers might not be so inclined.
Essentially, Christian and secular libertarians share common goals, but disagree on the underlying objective of government. Christian libertarians believe that government is only valid if it helps to maintain and support Natural Law as understood through a traditional Christian moral code. Other significant differences lie with the nature and source of our rights. In the words of Thomas Jefferson:

  • We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and inalienable rights; that among these, are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. —United States Declaration of Independence as originally written by Thomas Jefferson, 1776

Without invoking the name of God, secularists can only promise “government-granted” rights. Christian libertarians view these precariously, as they could be revoked. A famous example of this is the liberal democracy of the Weimar Republic in 1920s Germany. As the Nazi Party under Adolf Hitler took power in the early 1930s during the Great Depression, the rights granted under Germany’s constitution became irrelevant.

Christian libertarians agree with other libertarians on most issues. However, there are several issues that they often disagree to some extent:

  1.  Abortion. While many secular libertarians feel that the government must not have the power to compel a woman to maintain pregnancy and promote abortion as a human right, Christian libertarians often contend – on the basis of the belief that life begins at conception – that there are two lives involved in the decision. Thus, they argue that the government does have a role in protecting the life, liberty, and property of individuals, including unborn citizens. That said, there is still debate about who should be prosecuted, under what circumstances, and how to ensure safeguards against an unintentional miscarriage being confused with willful abortion.Anarcho-capitalism. Another area, where Christian and secular libertarians disagree, is in restraining libertarian economic policies. Where many secular libertarians support few, if any, limits on economic activity or anarcho-capitalism, Christian libertarians often see the value in restraining anarcho-capitalism with agreed upon values that are Christian based. Values such as mandatory Christian holidays off from work including the Sabbath (Sunday), child labor laws, and utilizing God’s creation (the environment) in a responsible way are all valid community decisions.
  2. Commercialized vices. Many secular libertarians would have a society where there would be no limit on vices such as pornographyprostitutiongambling and recreational drug use because these are open dealings between consenting adults. Often, Christian libertarians take the view that while secular governments tend to overreach, there could be reasonable limits if enacted at the local level, and aimed mainly at public (rather than private) settings. This includes restrictions on where it is available, attempting to separate its influence from young people, and allowing local communities to ban it from their jurisdiction. While viewed as being primarily in the realm of the Church to discourage these activities, nonetheless, government should not be promoting any such behavior that is self-destructing.
  3. Same sex marriage. This can be a contentious issue among libertarians of all stripes, including Christian libertarians. Their decisions often come down to whether government is merely allowing this activity, or promoting something that is understood to be against moral norms from a traditional Christian viewpoint. Christian libertarians will often defend rights for same-sex couples to form contracts between each other (e.g. civil unions), have visitation rights in places such as hospitals, and the right to pass on property to each other. Nevertheless, many Christian libertarians stop short of support for same-sex marriage, and often contend that the state should have no authority to define the terms of marriage. In a Christian libertarian form of government, society as a whole may not have the ability to ban the vast majority of activities between consenting adults. However, it cannot advocate and promote anti-Christian morals either.

Source post via Sooner Politics

Related Articles via Sooner Politics  and friends on facebook during the Libertarian Convention in Orlando Florida 2016:

Gary Johnson Survives to Win Libertarian Nomination

Accommodating the Growth of Liberty by Alex Allen

Oklahoma Republicans Not Welcome, to Some Libertarians 

Libertarian Candidate Strips Live on C-Span

Special Convention Coverage: Libertarian

More from Craig Dawkins here >>>

More from Tina Lou (Kelly), the Oklahoma Libertarian Party Chair here >>>

More from Dax Ewbanks, candidate for US Senate from Oklahoma here >>>

SoonerPolitics.org About SoonerPolitics.org
David Van Risseghem has recreated the look and feel of a newspaper online for the Conservative movement in Oklahoma. He shares that the spectrum of Conservative vision will have diverse manifestations. Solid reasoning is expected and clarity of expressed values is to be appreciated. Freedom of the press is not just for commercial press. It is the citizen's right to distribute His Free Speech. See more of Sooner Politics Online