Story on front page

http://www.newsday.com/news/columnists/ny-opkea195100209feb19,0,5883310.column?coll=ny-news-columnists

is identified as NewsMax - it's actually Newsday.

As a Libertarian philosopher entree, I am compelled to make you aware of the statements made by the Libertarian Party's Southeastern Representative, Bob Barr. On May 18th, 1999, as U.S. Representative of Georgia, the legislator released a press release in which he demanded an "end to taxpayer-funded witchcraft on American Military Base" (aforementioned quotation provided by the Religious Toleration network, online database.)
Incredulously, Mr. Barr would discriminate and prevent religious worship of our fine men and women in uniform from their constitutional rights based on misinformation. "Witchcraft" is a practiced engaged by some, not all, followers of the religion, "Wicca," recognized as such in several court decisions, most notably the Georgia State Supreme Court: Roberts vs. Ravenwood Church of Wicca (1982). According to a recent article printed in the USA TODAY (11/24/06) this would affect 1,800 officially declared US Armed Forces service members who articulated their faith to be Wicca, an earth-based, peaceful spiritual path.
Is the Libertarian Party actually endorsing such an individual who would blatantly discriminate, even ban altogether, a soldier's fundamental constitutional right to the free exercise of worship?
In closing, I can not at this point officially support or endorse the Libertarian Party under such dubious leadership and representation as is exemplified in former Rep. Bob Barr, as I live in Hinesville, GA.
Hypocrisy runs rampant in political parties, has it invaded the Libertarians as well?

care to ask him what he thinks about it now, 8 years later?

I have dial-up, so I'll abstain.

But Bob Barr has a lot to offer the LP.

I've put a hex on him, so the witchcraft position won't be a problem in the future!

My uncle Aleister taught me well.

muuuohohahaha !!

Long term exposure to Libertarians tends to smooth the rough edges of one's illogic.

Also, when recent converts see the light, they can be far more motivated than long-time cynics.

All religious views need to be tolerated in all places of voluntary attendance. Government facilities are not voluntary. We NEED to interface with government, it is criminal to ignore your government. Therefore, in order to represent all views equally, the government must vigorously abstain from all religious display.

That is not to say a Senator can't pray - he just can't pray AS A SENATOR. When he goes home and is a private citizen again, say a prayer, cast a spell, whatever you do is great with me.

I wrote this on the topic of prayer in school, but the principle it is based on applies here as well.
http://hyper2.com/essays/schoolprayer.html

Mr. Barr's comments eight years ago is a window into his predjudiced mind and are certaintly worthy of review today. As far as the display of religious worship on government facilities, The Congress opens with a Christian Prayer before session; I am told it is "tradition." In response then Pagans should be allowed to have open freedom of religious expression on military bases, as is afforded to all other service members of traditional religious denominations. In fact, Ft. Stewart, GA is in the process of building a huge Christian Church; yet pagans have no religious support, nor an officially designated location to practice within. Pagans are ridiculed when they ask for such services, or worse, receive death threats. Religious intoleration runs rampant in this culture, whether we want to "own" it or not. As a libertarian, it is our duty to protect the minority's liberties as well as the majority's. Mr. Barr needs to answer for his bigotry pronounced in the news releases of past as he is now touted as the Southeastern Representative and an "official" card carrying member of the Libertarian Party which prides itself on "liberty for all." I have written to both the "spewer" of hatred, Mr. Barr and the Executive Director, Mr. Burke, at the headquarters in Washington D.C. for a formal reconcillation of these contradictory views held by Mr. Barr. As a new member of the Military Pagan Network and espoused Libertarian, I have yet to receive an "official" response from either parties. Is the topic simply too "hot" to handle?

Guess what: you wont get it. The entire society is biased against religous minorities of any kind; I'm a Deist, and most people have never even heard of my religion. I get labeled either a agnostic or atheist. I go on about my business.

I think your topic is too marginal to handle. Do you really think the LP's hot topic of the day is attacking the only LNC member with real world political experience and a former Congressman about his beliefs about something he did or said in 1999? Were you a Pagan in 1999?

Hey, I got a idea. Lets form a official LP grand inquisitor position so we can examine every single thing any LP supporter has ever done or said. That way we dont have to worry about it all, they can just apologize and go into rehab. We can have a party of each single individual, but they cant ever meet to talk to each other - they might not agree to be libertarian enough. We'll have a political party of tens of thousands of individuals that can never meet each other. Like the song says, 'you got to to keep em seperated.' Lets send em all to LP rehab where the ghosts of Rand and Rothbard can put em back on track.

Stupid silly BS. If Bob Barr doesnt meet your standards, then vote him out when he comes up for reelection. Attacking him on what he thought in 1999 on anything is chicken sh-it. It's 2007.

TOM SELLECK! Libertarian candidate for president!
Pass it on!

Timothy West is a Deist, that's excellent! Some of my favorite people were Deist!

http://hyper2.com/essays/deist.html

We should support equal treatment under the law for all religious belief systems, including non-believers, regardless of what Bob Barr said in 1999 and regardless even if he still believes it now - which I have no idea about.

On the sixth day God created Man. Or was it the other way around?

For your information, Mr. West, I have been a pagan for nearly 30 years now and I personally do not think espoused bigotry is a "marginal topic." If Libertarians like yourself do, then I will never join this party and you can go on supporting a hyprocrite!! Are you that desperate for "real world experience" that you will just take whatever blows your way? I personally feel that the standards of the party should never be lowered to accomodate an individual who espoused prejudicial comments regardless of when he said them. And the comment about rehab is null and void in this debate unless you of course want to attend for your deleted and subtle profanities expressed in a forum which expressly prohibits this type of discourse. You, kind sir, are entitled to your opinion, as I am to mine. That is a democracy. But using the derogatory slang professed in your diatribe is neither adult rational discourse nor civilized behavior!! Any public figure is apt to be scrutinized whether they like it or not, especially a "representative" because his personal and political views comes into policy making. That kind Sir, is a topic of great interest to me.

Nancy is right that "real world experience" need not be the requirement to lead. Martin Luther King, Jr. transformed this country simply by speaking. He led without ever holding political office.

Ghandi began his movement by protesting injustice by himself when others were afraid to join him.

It only takes a strong will.

Tim, Nancy's right. Are you capable of a thought without profanity in it?

Nancy, Tim's right. You're making a big deal out of something stupid. Okay, you're a pagan. No one cares.

This commentary was never about me or whether I am right or wrong. I could care less! I merely am pointing out bigotry and hypocrisy where I find it. In leadership those two faults, in my opinion, should disqualify a canidate to be worthy to "represent." You can form your own opinions, as I have formed mine. I also know apathy when I hear it, and I also see enlightenment when I feel it. This discourse has reached its inevitable conclusion. I bid thee farewell and wish those true Libertarians to stay the course with discourse.

Nancy, I see in you a problem that people point out in me. The more noble my argument, the more formal my language. It actually works against me. When my text and speech get TOO formal people tune me out.

I caught myself skipping sentences in your longest post. As soon as I realized what I had done I wanted to relate my experiences to you.

I say this not to be critical, but as a suggestion for you to be more effective. Your points and arguments are worthy of people's attention. I struggle with the same affliction. We're all in this together.

The link to thinkLibertarian works, but once there, I couldn't get the audio interview to work. Stephen's commentary focused on the interviewers, not the interviewed Bob Barr.

In other words, we should just assume Bob Barr is okay, and let's talk about the activists.

Let me get this straight. An unrepentent former prosecutor and drug war zealot--is now the new libertarian icon. Because--he opposes the Iraq war? Since when is non-interventionism foreign policy an all-purpose litmus test for libertarianism?

His belief in drug war interventionism is not just history. He does not repent, except to say, perhaps states should be allowed medical marijuana. However, we already have that, and it's not working well, because federal law prevails. Small-scale medical growers are now harassed and threatened with federal prosecution.

What is needed, is federal legislation exempting small growers from federal prosecution in states allowing medical marijuana exemptions. Bob Barr is silent on that issue.

Tim, Nancy's right. Are you capable of a thought without profanity in it?

HELL NO! ;D