0 votes

Dr. Chuck Baldwin Promoting Collectivism under the Guise of Liberty

THE REGION, INDIANA – As someone who came to the defense of Dr. Chuck Baldwin upon the release of the MIAC report last year, it is very disheartening to me upon reading his latest post to discover he is nothing more than a charlatan in the vein of Beck, promoting his brand of collectivism under the guise of Liberty. In his latest article, which from the title onward is filled with an over abundant use of logical fallacies and half-baked collectivist rhetoric, he attempts to correlate being queer, a government take-over of health care, and violating immigration law as one in the same, ergo “Guilt by Association”.

How he can resort to such nonsense after he was the victim of...

http://libertypulse.com/article/5066

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
BMWJIM's picture

Allie, Thank you for this article.

Individuals must understand that everyone is different. I have served with the most macho of men and some of the most macho of gay men. This type of dialog is not conducive to liberty. I personally don't give a rats ass who is covering my back as long as they cover my back.

You are a breath of fresh air to the liberty movement. Lifestyles are a personal thing and NO ONE has a right to judge. If they judge they are not for liberty.

Semper Fi my Friend! You are a Patriot.

1976-1982 USMC, Having my hands in the soil keeps me from soiling my hands on useless politicians.

Bob Barr was right.

When he chided Dr. Paul's decision to endorse who Barr called a "theocrat."

Give the devil his dues.

If they attack your motivations or call you a troll, rather than debating the substance of your argument, you've won the debate. If they do this AND address your argument, they know their argument is weak and are trying to make up for that.

"When fascism comes to

"When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross"

i wasn't able to read the

i wasn't able to read the entire article, but i agree with the premise. mainstream christianity does not in any way line up with the principles of liberty. it doesn't matter how many 501 c3 forms you refuse to sign. mainstream christianity is a distortion of old roman/nicean creed imperialist thinking, which manifests this kind of rhetoric today. unfortunately, chuck is subscribing to that exact kind of fundamentalist thought in this case, and in this way, promoting the nicean empire's burning of all other written testimony and spiriual literature about christ.

Just Another Bigot

He is just another bigot wrapped in the flag of Christ.

you don't know what the word

you don't know what the word bigot means. So since Ron Paul endorsed this fine gentleman for the presidency I suppose Ron Paul is a bigot?

“Defiance of God’s Law will eventually bring havoc to a society.” - Dr. Ron Paul

Funny...

Ron Paul has a similar view, that the current policy should not be changed. Is he a bigot, too?

reedr3v's picture

Ron Paul is a gentleman, kind and fair

to all. That cannot be said of bigot Baldwin. Nor does Baldwin have the best interest of Liberty at heart, or he would not attack peaceful individuals who choose a lifestyle different from his own authoritarian bible morality.
As narrowly as he views gays, I negatively view those who are anti-any group of non-aggressive people.

I love gays.

We need more homosexuals, particularly in the liberty movement.

More gays, more gays, more gays!!!!

We also need an all-inclusive Constitution Party. I'm very much in favor of hijacking the current one and giving the current leadership noogies for being so short-sighted and dressing poorly.

Ron Paul "Sign Wave Across the USA" -- November 5th!

Lisa a few new pom poms

Lisa a few new pom poms placed in the right area will do them wonders. Besides everyone will notice them then!!

I agree more gays and more pom poms!!

I am not sure

libertypulse knows what collectivism is.

they don't... this is the

they don't... this is the only problem I see with the "liberty" movement. Some see liberty and freedom as being free from a tyrant. Some see liberty and freedom from having any moral bounds.

“Defiance of God’s Law will eventually bring havoc to a society.” - Dr. Ron Paul

I Wrote the Article...

LibertyPulse merely linked to the article and placed here on the DailyPaul.

And I am fully aware of the definition of collectivism.

Collectivism: The belief that one group's right trumps another or minority group's right based on the benefit of the whole.

When Dr. Baldwin seeks to imply that Liberty is only for those heterosexuals and somehow superior to the minority rights of the LGBT people-group, he is baiting his readers with collectivism, ergo that heter rights are superior to homo rights and thus within the purview to trample upon.

Allison Bricker

http://SmArgus.com

"None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free." - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Allison something to sooth your inner chaos.

Ayn Rand, developer of the philosophy of Objectivism asserted that a group, as such, has no rights. A man can neither acquire new rights by joining a group nor lose the rights which he does possess.

The principle of individual rights is the only moral base of all groups or associations. She maintained that since only an individual man can possess rights, the expression "individual rights" is a redundancy (which one has to use for purposes of clarification in today’s intellectual chaos), but the expression "collective rights" is a contradiction in terms.

Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual).

Before you start attacking me. Calling me a bigot and other names. Read my post. Not in a single post will you find me bashing gays or even saying gays should not be in the military.

Fact is I may be the only person on this forum who served with gays in the military.

What I am doing is outing those who pretend to be champions of rights ("individual rights" is a redundancy which one has to use for purposes of clarification in today’s intellectual chaos)
when in reality they desire/demand group rights based on their/societies/governments assigned group.

There are hetro and homo sexual rights?

I thought rights belonged to individuals? Are you saying rights come from being a part of a group? It appears to me you are. so therefore you are promoting COLLECTIVISM.

I this is not collectivism please explain.

Update: 7:23 EST

Allison you are promoting collectivist rights but pretend to be against collectivism. You seem to think your personal behavior makes you special and as such you DEMAND special protections. Then you attack those who disagree with you. Calling them "bigots" and calling DP members BS's for not agreeing with you.

In my opinion you are the one who cares not for personal liberty since you openly attack anyone who disagrees with your DEMANDS for special collective rights based on your own personal choices.

If you want to lobby for GAY RIGHTS aka COLLECTIVISM, go for it. But stop misrepresenting yourself and attacking others.

What is your REAL MISSION here? Liberty and rights for the individual? or special rights, protections, and privileges for your own personal lifestyle choices?

I have noticed how you fall back of FOX NEWS style patriotism. Saying gays just want to server in the military. I am a veteran and served with gay men. So gays can serve in the military now. So please tell us EXACTLY want your DEMANDS are.

I have no Demands

As I would never willfully join the current sorry state of the Armed Forces which sends off individuals to fight in pointless aggressive wars.

Please show me exactly where it is that I say there are Homo rights and Hetero rights. My only reference to the afore demographics came from the behaviors committed by individuals of their respective demographic.

The reason those Lesbian and Gay soldiers would like not to have to hide their lives is that since they are willing to fight and die for this country no questions asked,is so that if they are

  • Able to designate their benefits to their partners should they be killed in combat w/o risk of losing those benefits for naming their same-sex partner as beneficiary or be kicked out merely by stating the designation of their benefits

  • Be able to receive mail from their partners w/o risk of being outed and discharged

These are the types of things that LGBT service members seek a revocation of DADT.

It is understandable that these would escape your consideration as neither would have been of any concern to you while enlisted.

Allison Bricker

http://SmArgus.com

"None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free." - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Thank you for your response Allison.

So far you are the ONLY person to actually respond without slinging accusations or posing a straw-man argument. Thank you Thank you.

I think your two points about benefits and communication/mail are very reasonable. Perhaps it would be wiser for LGBT's in the military and their civilian supporters to stick with a handful of specific demands. By the way there is nothing wrong with demands. We must DEMAND to be FREE.

Are you sure about point 2 though? When I served mail was not screened/opened etc. So receiving mail would not be an issue.
Do you have any knowledge that there is a SIGNIFICANT problem with mail privacy being breached?

P.S. Just had some memory recall of when I was filling out papers on who should get my insurance money if I were to be killed. As I recall I could have chosen a "friend" to receive the money it did not have to go to a spouse or a parent. Would this still be an option?

P.S.S. Since you asked me where you said there are hetro/homo rights here it is.

"When Dr. Baldwin seeks to imply that Liberty is only for those heterosexuals and somehow superior to the minority rights of the LGBT people-group" - Allison

P.S.S. Reply

March 30, 2010

Black Ops:

My point in saying that when Dr. Baldwin is arguing that Hetero rights are superior to LGBT rights, he presents a false dichotomy.

By appealing to what one can safely assume is his core demographic people-group, i.e. white straight Christian males and levying to position that LGBT individuals should not have the same rights is a flawed divisive point from which to begin philosophically.

To me, regardless of whatever demographic group we may belong to as all individuals fall into a myriad, all that matters in the end is the respect for and protection of, our Natural Liberties and the protection thereof.

When Dr. Baldwin however uses guilt by association linking one demographic (LGBT) in the same sentence and thought stream as illegal immigration and socialized medicine, he creates a wedge which seeks to divide along demographic lines.

Hopefully this clarifies my philosophical position.

Regarding mail that is received by soldiers, from what I have been told it all depends where one is stationed whether or not the mail/care packages are screened prior to delivery.

Regardless, of potential screening, imagine getting a picture of your spouse and son or daughter. Imagine the pride you might feel, and how you would be wanting to share the picture and the news with your fellow soldiers, pin the picture next to your bunk, gush about how you miss them so much and cannot wait to return home to see them.

While it is beyond my knowledge how prevalent this experience is, we had a friend prior to moving back up north from Indianapolis, who was discharged for a similar situation after her partner signed the back of a picture of her partner and adopted daughter.

So it is sort of an abstract thing, but not being able to speak about your life at home with your fellow soldiers or worse making up giant lies about your life outside the military is not good for an individual's mental health.

And as figures show, soldiers deployed in combat already have enough mental anguish to deal without having to bottle up their life and fear every word spoken as the one which leads to their removal.

Allison Bricker

http://SmArgus.com

"None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free." - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Perhaps then we should also stop infringing the rights of

rapists and child-molestors and thieves and murderers? After all- "wife-beaters" are people too, aren't they?

Shop-lifters find "pleasure" in stealing things... who are you (as a part of the awful collective) to deny their "preference"? By what right do you have to deny their pleasurable experience? [sarcasm]

Homosexuality (for many people at least) is a matter of moral decay- just like all of the other aforementioned "collectivist issues".

Tell the truth (if you have children): which would you rather leave your nine year old child with: a straight babysitter or a gay babysitter?

reedr3v's picture

Are you fantasizing that straights are

moral and gays immoral? What a foolish notion. By far most rapists, abusers, and violent, aggressive people are straight.

In the real work homosexuals are victims far more often than attackers. Just look at the threads on this issue. I never see gays verbally attacking straights. The opposite is common.

Please stop with Such Juvenile Assertions

To me if as a parent you are concentrating on what the sexuality of your teenage babysittter might be, you already have some serious sexual dysfunction.

You offer to compare me being a lesbian to a child molester and rapist?

Really, WTF is wrong with you?

Please explain how having a consensual relationship with another individual is the same as someone who violates another's body by forced sexual intercourse or violates the innocence and rights of a child by use of force.

It saddend me greatly that you cannot delineate that liberty means allowing people to do as they please unless they violate some one's person or propert through force or fraud.

Please consider reading "The Rights of Man" by Thomas Paine"

Allison Bricker

http://SmArgus.com

"None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free." - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Its about Actions NOT Orientation

It matters not about the sexual orientation of the soldier.

What does matter is if the soldier whether heterosexual or homosexual proceedes in acting promiscuously or violates another individuals rights via rape or any other sexual crime.

If heterosexuals were having an orgy on base with prostitutes or if a barracks of lesbians were having a sex party both acts are deplorable and those guilty should be punished.

But contrary to the biggots, those of us in the LGBT community who wish to see DADT lifted do so as we would like for those soldiers who are in combat to speak openly about mail received from a partner or to send notice of the death to their partner without risking losing the benefits earned by their service.

So those who prefer to debase the argument with hyperbole and attempt to link the LGBT community to detestable acts resulting in the violation of a child need to grow up or at least attempt to develop an intellect.

Gays and Lesbians bleed the same red blood when killed in the line of combat. And why it is beyond me why my friends in the LGBT community would be willing to fight for this nation both based on the aggressive foreign policy and the fact that the Armed Services hetero-superiority, they should be allowed to serve w/o contemplating how best to hide their lives as they offer to sacrifice for their country.

Allison Bricker

http://SmArgus.com

"None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free." - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

.

"So those who prefer to debase the argument with hyperbole and attempt to link the LGBT community to detestable acts resulting in the violation of a child need to grow up or at least attempt to develop an intellect"

Your argument would hold more water if the lgbt community was not so intent on teaching 5 year olds about sex. Or that every country with the lgbt community in power manages to lower the age of consent lower and lower.

Maybe you need to open your eyes.

Please Do Not

Continue Mr. Baldwin's logical fallacy of guilt by association.

As I am not responsible for the actions of other queer folk.

As it would be unfair to lay blame upon Christians like Dr. Paul for all the atrocities, the institution of slavery and murderous wars started in the name of Christianity’s God.

The past or current actions of others within our demographic should not taint our lives.

Can you understand this simple principle?

Moreover, why not try to back up your appeal to disdain by listing all the countries with a Gay or Lesbian at the head of government who has lowered the age of consent in successive terms?

So then, am I to understand that Queers must administer the State of Kentucky since their age of consent is 14, which in my opinion is fat too young?

Further are gays responsible for the several states that still allow marriage to Second Cousins as that also seems a most atrocious reality to me as well.

Thus, can you please try to base your counterpoint at least somewhere in the sphere of reason as opposed to nonsensical fallacy?

Allison Bricker

http://SmArgus.com

"None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free." - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

"Gays and Lesbians bleed the same red blood..."

Actually, they don't... which is why the medics don't want to get anywhere near them.

Have a pretty day.

The comments on this thread are confusing to me.

Does everyone here understand that you give up rights when you sign a contract with the military?

Does everyone know serving in the military is NOT a protected RIGHT?

Does everyone here know that there are restrictions on heterosexual activity in the military?

One final question:

Should there be any restrictions on homosexual activity in the military and if so, what?

Did you know some of

Did you know some of history's best known military figures were gay? Who other than a gay person would be able to channel a survivor instinct into a position of power over collective intimidation and marginalization under the protection of military might?

I noticed you did not answer a single question.

But rather pose the classic straw man argument.

I served with gay men in the military so what is the point of your statement? Have you served with gay men in the military?

Update: @ 6:18PM EST

No response?

Well Chuck, first it was the

Well Chuck, first it was the Ancient Greeks who advocated open same-sex relationships in the military to boost morale1 prior to the assimilation in the Roman Republic proper. Perhaps Dr. Baldwin meant that the fall of Rome was due to homosexuals, in which case he would still be wrong as same-sex relations were well tolerated in Rome from prior to the reign of the notoriously flamboyant Caligula around 41 AD right up until the coronation of Theodosius in 380 AD.

what is it that you people do not get? Immorality is a symptom of the a sickness that has taken down all "empires".. wether it is bankers looting the treasury, perverts destroying the family with same sex relationships, grred, the bribing of the congress opr the lust for power. What I can't get my head around is that people here do not understand is this.. Freedom and liberty from a tyrant is different then taking the liberty to do as one pleases in the face of God and his commandments. As you all know, Not one ancient nation, city state, empire etc has survived more then what 800 years? why? because sin destroyed them. They become prosporous and then seek acts of perversion,greed etc.
It is the very same decay that the United States finds within in own boarders. The very act of this stupid artice shows that people have turned from a moral and just civilization to that of destruction.

Calling Chuck Baldwin a collectivist is crazy. Again,
seeking liberty and freedom from tyranny is different then seeking liberty to sin against God. Why is it people do not see this? Has the public school system and the national media done such a good job of brainwashing the public that they can not see the truth?
Is it hat people are afraid to be called "haters" and "homophobs" so they won't tell it the way it is?
Hell! lets let those People with no morality who like to have sex with children and animals in the military too!

Next weekend is passover. Please read the story of the exodus. Specifically read where Moses went up to the mountain to get the ten commandments from God, What were some of the people doing when he returned? What was the price the Hebrews paid as a whole?

The decisions some make in a society do have an effect on the whole society. I love Liberty and Freedom. Liberty and freedom from having someone in DC tell me that I must pay taxes, that I must take healthcare, etc etc etc. But liberty to do as one chooses away from morality is wrong. Sinning in the name of freedom and liberty is wrong.

I see some on here say oh Dr. Paul thinks that being a homosexual is ok. WRONG.. Dr. Paul is saying that fedral government has no right to tell you what you can do in your bedroom. I agree with this. Being a Christian if you were to ask Dr. Paul in private, do you agree with the homosexual lifestyle and support it,
Dr. Paul would say NO.

“Defiance of God’s Law will eventually bring havoc to a society.” - Dr. Ron Paul

Then You are unaware of Liberty and Dr. Paul

His campaign manager for his 2008 Presidential bid. Kent Snyder was openly gay and passed away in 2008.

Gee Dr. Paul specifically asked him to head up the campaign, but according to know-nothings such as you, that was merely public posturing? give me a break.

Further he stated in an interview during the campaign on a Christian Conservative Radio show, that it is the behavior that matters whether homo or hetero, so again save us your false conclusions on what Dr. Paul's thoughts are on the matter as you have demonstrated a total lack of knowledge.

He also said in that interview the he believes from his experience as physician that he sees this as a way people are born, not a "lifestyle" choice.

Further, when a person attempts to place one demographic group's right's as superior to another demographic group's rights whether based on fear ignorance or both, it is the textbook definition of "Collectivism".

So save me the BS about you believing in Liberty, as it is obvious you believe in Liberty for you according to your morality.

If no one's rights are violated there is not immoral act. My natural right to love as I see fit is wholly outside the purview of your narrow-view of morality.

It seems to me you need not only an education on Liberty, but also a dictionary.

Allison Bricker

http://SmArgus.com

"None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free." - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe