50 votes

Beliefs of a libertarian Christian in less than 400 words.

Disclaimer up front: libertarian is the adjective and Christian is the noun.

I believe in the Apostle's Creed, either traditional or ecumenical versions. Additionally I believe God is the sustainer of the universe; no God, no universe.

As God gave man free will, I believe God intends for man to be libertarian. Giving man the ability to accept or reject God is the ultimate in liberty.

I believe that the Christian Bible is the inspired word of God.

I believe that atheists and agnostics can be as moral as any Christian.

I agree with at least 95% of Ron Paul's books, "Liberty Defined" and "End the Fed". I agree with at least 95% of Judge Napolitano's books, "A Nation of Sheep", "Lies the Government told You", and "It is Dangerous to Be Right when the Government is Wrong".

I believe that all laws must agree with Natural Law; as St. Augustine said "An unjust law is is no law at all."

I believe the Constitution and Bill of Rights are the law of this land and that any subsequent federal law not required by those documents is invalid.

I believe in the sanctity of human life, in utero and on death row.

I believe all wars involving the U.S. since 1850 have been immoral.

I believe in the Zero Agression Principle; that is, violence of any type (if used) should only be used in defense.

I believe most American Christians wouldn't know a "just war" if they saw it.

I believe more government always means less freedom and liberty.

I believe if "justice" is the solution, then "judgment" is on the table; they are inseparable. I believe only God's judgment is always just.

I believe you cannot successfully legislate morality. Attempts to legislate morals with regards to sex, alcohol, and drugs will invaribly fail.

I believe that I can't be good enough to get into heaven.

I believe that God will forgive me if some of my beliefs are wrong.

And finally, I believe Stevie Ray Vaughan was one of the greatest Christian guitarists of all time.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

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

Proverbs is great


Lord Acton, Lord Chief Justice of England, 1875 - "The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the People v. The Banks."

I am guilty of fueling flame wars

between the christian libertarians and the atheist libertarians.

I apologize. I really like the DP and don't want to see all of the great work done by ALL liberty lovers wasted over irrelevant bickering.

So, how bout we all leave theology and anti-theology at the door and create posts that do not bait the opposite side into trolling?

I am happy that you are a libertarian. I don't care that you're a christian. If it makes you happy, go nuts.

I, honestly, wanted to troll the S*** out your post, but at the last second, I thought to myself that it perhaps would be better to leave things be.

I don't want to tell you what to do, but merely offer the suggestion that such blatantly theological posts only preach to the choir or piss us atheists/anti-theists off.

In the interest of unity, shall we try to come to an understanding?

Feel free to downvote me and S***. A lot of people do.

We can only be kept in the cages we do not see. - Stefan Molyneux

You are a function of what the whole universe is doing in the same way that a wave is a function of what the whole ocean is doing. - Alan Watts

Also, I just read this RP quote:

In both political education and organization, coalitions are worthwhile and necessary to have an impact. “Talking to the choir” alone achieves little. I have always approached political and economic education with a “missionary” zeal by inviting any group in on issues we agree upon. This opens the door to legitimate discourse with the hope of winning new converts to the cause of liberty...In the meantime, why can’t we be friends, respectful of each other, and fight the corrupt process from which we suffer...I’m convinced we win by working with others. Those who don’t want to collaborate are insecure with their own beliefs..."

Then he says this:

"Ironically the most difficult group to recruit has been the evangelicals who supported McCain and his pro-war positions. They have been convinced that they are obligated to initiate preventive war in the Middle East for theological reasons. Fortunately, this is a minority of the Christian community, but our doors remain open to all despite this type of challenge. The point is, new devotees to the freedom philosophy are more likely to come from the left than from those conservatives who have been convinced that God has instructed us to militarize the Middle East."

I disagree w Ron here when he says that this is a minority of the Christian community. I also disagree that Christians are less likely to see the light - it just takes time and background knowledge into the books of the Bible, you have to really get on their good side to get them to open their minds. I think this is what Rand is doing; he's trying to bring those less-likely liberty-lovers back into the fold, but its a tough task and will take some time. One thing I will not accuse Rand of doing is preaching to the choir. We all move forward in ways which best suit our ability.

fyi these quotes are from: www.ronpaul.com/2008-09-23/ron-paul-endorses-chuck-baldwin-f...

half of what the dp is these days

is preaching to the choir. However, some of the most interesting things I have learned on this site have been in the comments of some post with an annoying headline that stayed in the active topics for weeks and I finally checked to see what all the fuss was about. Its good to read actual discussions, but usually all we get are sensationalism on both sides.

Fact is that 1,500 dpers have their thoughts read by 107,000 people everyday. Its good to be thoughtful about what you type and post. The best way to bury a thread is not to bump or comment. Last thing you want to do is troll and bump. (even right now, I'm going back and reading this and considering not even posting this. maybe i'm crazy?)

In the spirit of "restoring constitutional government to the united states" we need ideas for changing the minds/ waking up everyone. I see it as good to have ideas for speaking with different types of people. I think the Christian population is the most prime candidate for understanding the importance of liberty; because they already believe in it, they just do not know it. Its getting them to open their mind that matters. And how do we get someone to open their minds? Tempering. Play them out, see where they are coming from. I talk to strangers all the time - I can start with a simple, "some weather," and read the person and wind up telling them about fractional reserve banking or the idea of blowback and non-intervention. I've never turned anyone off because I temper their needs, but still give them the same idea in the end.

"Educate and inform the whole mass of the people. Enable them to see that it is their interest to preserve peace and order, and they will preserve them. And it requires no very high degree of education to convince them of this. They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty." -TJ

Excellent Post

I am a Christian and I agree almost everything you listed.

You are what I would call a neo-fundalmentalist

You may want to view this and rethink what some of your beliefs are.


Very good

I would only argue that the life's sanctity includes women, and that anything "in utero" is part of them. It is not "life" until she blesses it with her consent to bear and nurture it to life. Your ideal may be "moral high ground" from one perspective, but that tiny little smattering of women, that RARE case where a woman gets raped and gets pregnant.... it is real, and you would ride your moral high horse right over the top of the victims.
But you are dead on about Stevie Ray!

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

Right, the fetus with

Right, the fetus with separate DNA that attaches to the uterus is a part of the womans body. That makes so much sense.

Right. A "foreign object" or "infection" technically.

You see, that strange DNA is not there by her consent. If a man's finger falls off in a woman's mouth, she has the right to remove it. If a man's sperm is forced into her, she has the right to remove it, and any damaged tissue that ensued from the attack.
But I am really not here to argue, I am here to try to get folks to learn to put aside differences and stand on whatever tiny patch of common ground we might find.
My brother, let us rock:

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

I see your Rothbard and raise

I see your Rothbard and raise you a Fr. James A. Sadowsky, SJ. http://www.anthonyflood.com/sadowskyabortion.htm

Non-aggression applies to the unborn as much as it does the born.

And I call you, with Vaughn.

Let us celebrate our differences, and dance upon our common ground.

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

I see your Rothbard and raise

I see your Rothbard and raise you a Fr. James A. Sadowsky, SJ. http://www.anthonyflood.com/sadowskyabortion.htm

Non-aggression applies to the unborn as much as it does the born.

Re libertarian Christians

Thank you, freeVirginia. I, too, consider myself a libertarian Christian. I agree with 95% of what you've said. (P.S. I couldn't help but think of this song: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqsiPPfzGic)

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

excellent post.

excellent post.

Thank you.

This is the kind of thing that made the DP inspiring to me in the first place.

"Here's what I believe - and I consider those who disagree to still be friends." Unity with diversity; disagreement with respect.

I kinda feel like I did when I first came across this site. Thanks again. :) I feel like we should already be mobilizing for 2016.

What Holds Us Together

The thing that seems to hold us all together is our ability to disagree, lol.

www.standardexcellence.net - Bringing you Oklahoma, Texas and national news & opinion that matters for liberty.

Looks good.

"I believe that God will forgive me if some of my beliefs are wrong." That doesn't get me off the hook, here and now. Lol!

An even longer list of the same sort.

The Law of Nations 1758 http://www.constitution.org/vattel/vattel.htm

Referred to in the Constitution.

Section 8.10
The Congress shall have Power To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;

The Law of Nations called each individual a nation, a sovereign. A complement to the Magna Carta and English common law.

The Constitution is based on many of the liberal principles described in the Law of Nations. I've only scratched the surface and was fascinated by what I found.

Free includes debt-free!

interesting, I've not read this before.

It is a settled point with writers on the natural law, that all men inherit from nature a perfect liberty and independence, of which they cannot be deprived without their own consent. In a State, the individual citizens do not enjoy them fully and absolutely, because they have made a partial surrender of them to the sovereign. But the body of the nation, the State, remains absolutely free and independent with respect to all other men, and all other Nations, as long as it has not voluntarily submitted to them.

Atheists are moral people

Atheists are moral people because all humans are made in God's image. He's a moral God so we are moral people. This is why, ironically, atheists who reject absolute morality still think within moral categories. "Morals are merely societal and change with the time/culture" they say... but on the other hand proclaim that horrendous acts such as rape or murder are "wrong", "bad" and "evil" in all times and all places. They can't escape God's image, no matter how hard they try.

So, yes, while an atheist certainly does moral things, this doesn't mean he can be "as moral as a Christian". Unbelief and lack of faith itself is immoral. Otherwise God couldn't send people to hell for not staying faithful to him.

Lastly, all law is legislated morality. That's inescapable. If you think, "thou shall not murder" should be a law against murder, then you are legislating morality. It is proper and right to do so. The difference, Biblically, is that not all sins are crimes. Civil crimes in the Bible are usually ones that violate the life, body or property of another human being. Lust and greed are sins, but they are not crimes. They are matters of the heart, and police cannot see your heart.

Just a small critique

You sort of countered your own position. You said that civil crimes are ones that violate the life, body or property of another human being. Agreed - in the Bible or not. All civil law is based on the libertarian view of personal property and not violating the rights of others. And...that is what murder laws are about, not based on the Bible at all. Murder has been considered a crime since pre-Biblical law.

And, just to emphasize that point. The "Commandments" you reference from Exodus (all 29), do not say "Thou shalt not murder", that is the watered-down version presented to sheeple. God commands that the Israelites shall not murder another Israelite. People of other nation-clans were fair game.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

Well, as a Xtian I believe

Well, as a Xtian I believe that a Biblical worldview is the only consistent and logical worldview. The non-aggression axiom (while I accept it, on Biblical grounds) is actually an unprovable tenet from the secular-libertarian or anarchist position. But that's another topic for another time...

Your other comment doesn't make much sense to me. "People of other nation-clans were fair game"?! That's nowhere in the Bible. Check out Deuteronomy 20. It details a non-interventionist war policy for general attacks but then distinguishes the specific nations Israel was to demolish. They were to demolish them based on Noah's curse against Canaan. These were the only nations the Israelites were to destroy. All others were self-defensive only... not "fair game."

Can I get some more info

on the 'watered down' version vs the foreigners are 'fair game' version? thanks.

How can I be a moral person

How can I be a moral person because I was made in God's image and immoral at the same time because I don't believe? Are there different degrees of morality? Apparently so since as a non believer I could never be as moral a person as you, a Christian.
As for morality. How moral is it to condemn your children to eternal fire and damnation for not believing in something or someone there is no proof for? Doesn't sound very moral to me. I wouldn't do that to my children. Would you? How sad it is that your god would.
"Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear." Thomas Jefferson

It's funny that in your

It's funny that in your attempt to criticize my post, you actually demonstrated my point. You are obviously an atheist ("someone there is no proof for...") but then you hold God to some moral standard by judging his actions as immoral and evil. As an atheist, you cannot logically condemn any action as right or wrong. You don't believe in absolute, universal morality. You can't. That's atheism 101. If you don't like eternal fire and damnation, that's just your preference. But there's no way in which you can use a moral argument against anyone. It's all arbitrary, according to an atheistic premise.

I beg your pardon. I'm as

I beg your pardon. I'm as moral as most Christians. I won't say that I'm as moral as any Christian though, because undoubtedly there are some who live at a higher moral level than I, as I'm sure there are some atheists who do so as well.

But I try to live a moral life, and my lack of a belief in a supreme being is irrelevant in that regard. Morality can be logically deduced. The golden rule, the non aggression principle are completely logical. One doesn't have to fear retribution from a supreme being to recognize that these should be life principles.

I must be willing to give up what I am in order to become what I will be. Albert Einstein

I believe that atheists and

I believe that atheists and agnostics can be as moral as any Christian.

Thank you for this. Many "Christians" seem to have a blind spot regarding the separation of spirituality and morality.

I'm an atheist but I'm a true believer in the golden rule and the non aggression principle.

I must be willing to give up what I am in order to become what I will be. Albert Einstein

Amen lol

Amen lol


..."I believe that atheists and agnostics can be as moral as any Christian"...they can practice personal self-restraint, but what are their morals? Ever-changing I fear; whereas His are not!

CASE and POINT: "I believe you cannot successfully legislate morality."

Every law on the books legislates morality - and it keeps CHANGING!

I prefer the eternal law, the one I come FAR short of...

Good post though - thought provoking!

And I believe Christians and

And I believe Christians and other ghost believers will use their religion to justify anything and that is not ever-changing

and many atheists and a boom

and many atheists and a boom from nothing use their belief to justify anything also. all you have to do is look at every communist government that has ever been.