What shocked me even worse than the guy who wrote to me saying that libertarianism is Satanism is the number of people who wrote to me saying that they basically agreed with him.
Libertarianism, supposedly, allegedly:
Makes each individual his own king at the expense of the sovereignty of God.
Refuses to believe that all legitimate authority comes from God, and must be exercised in accordance with what He has laid down.
Makes our neighbor the measure of our actions instead of God.
Posits social indifference to the will of God.
Is indistinguishable from libertinism.
Ultimately brings down the wrath of God on the society that lives by such a premise.
Is identical to the satanic doctrine “Do what thou wilt.”
Flies in the face of the divine commandment, “Thou shalt not commit adultery.”
Has a diabolical origin.
Fails to differentiate between licentiousness and liberty.
Gives one freedom to break the commandments of God.
Is an abomination since it promotes the legalization of sodomy and sorcery, which are abominations in the sight of God.
Leads its adherents to be judged, found wanting, and exposed to the penalty for what God describes as witchcraft and rebellion.
Oh, and porn should be made illegal because it had an evil impact on Ted Bundy.
In my initial response, I just focused on the issue of adultery. I concluded that the government should not punish people for committing adultery. Let’s now expand this to other sins of the flesh.
Should the government punish people for fornication?
Should the government punish people for lasciviousness?
Should the government punish people for drunkenness?
Should the government punish people for debauchery?
Should the government punish people for premarital sex?
Should the government punish people for gluttony?
Should the government punish people for sodomy?
Should the government punish people for masturbation?
Should the government punish people for blasphemy?
Should the government punish people for viewing pornography?
Should the government punish people for making pornography?
Should the government punish people for selling “illegal” drugs?
Should the government punish people for using “illegal” drugs?
Should the government punish people for inordinate affection?
Should the government punish people for evil concupiscence?
Should the government punish people for one night stands?
Should the government punish people for hiring a prostitute?
Should the government punish people for being a prostitute?
Should the government punish people for uncleanness?
Should the government punish people for getting stoned?
Should the government punish people for evil speaking?
Should the government punish people for engaging in bondage and sadomasochism?
Should the government punish people for cross dressing?
Should the government punish people for identifying as the opposite gender?
Should the government punish people for homosexual activity?
Should the government punish people for mutilating their body to change their sex?
Should the government punish people for visiting a nudist beach or resort?
Should the government punish people for using profanity?
Should the government punish people for filthiness?
Should the government punish people for telling or laughing at dirty jokes?
Should the government punish people for working at a strip club?
Should the government punish people for patronizing a strip club?
We are not talking about acts of sodomy on public beaches, men wearing a dresses and using the women’s restroom, sexual assault, sex with a minor, putting drugs in someone’s drink, filming someone in the shower without their permission, public intoxication, school bus drivers smoking a crack pipe, passing out joints to girl scouts while they sell cookies, masturbating in public, showing pornography to children on the playground, recruiting high school cheerleaders to be prostitutes, shouting curse words at the Post Office, or walking around naked in the mall.
What we are talking about is whether the government punish people for doing these things if in doing so no one’s personal or property rights are violated? If these things are against God’s law—and as a theological and cultural conservative Christian I would agree that they are—should the government enforce God’s law when there is no victim?
Every real crime needs an actual victim—not a potential victim or a possible victim, but rather a tangible and identifiable victim who has suffered measurable harm to his person or measurable damages to his property.
There should be, as far as the law is concerned, no such things as nebulous crimes against God, religion, nature, society, humanity, civilization, the greater good, the public interest, or the state.
As it relates to the above sins of the flesh, there are really only three positions that a Christian can take.
Christian, if you think that the government should not punish people for doing any of these things as long as he doesn’t violate the personal or property rights of others, then you are on solid ground. This, of course, doesn’t mean that you think that any of these things are moral, wholesome, harmless, or not sin in the sight of Almighty God. If you think that it is God’s prerogative to do something about the practice of these things—in this life or the next—then you are scriptural in your approach.
Christian, if you think that the government should punish people for doing some of these things, but not all of them, then you are being terribly inconsistent. If you think that gluttony should go unpunished, and the high percentage of Americans who are obese should not be turned away from buffets, but that the government should lock people in cages for smoking marijuana or possessing an “illegal” pill, then you should not be taken seriously. You have no firm foundation or scriptural basis on which to pick and choose which sins that the government should punish. To just defer these decisions to the state shows that God is not your authority.
Christian, if you think that the government should punish people for doing any one of these things; that is, you believe that the government should enforce God’s law when there is no victim, then, yes, you are being consistent, but you are consistently against the whole tenor of New Testament Christianity. You are absolutely clueless about the New Testament ethic. I think these Christians are angry with God for allowing men to commit sins of the flesh, seemingly without retribution. But their argument is with God, not with libertarianism.
