TexasCHLforum.com

Some things are challenging, like impaired driving. But maybe we could start with a simple premise. Laws should not be passed to keep up from harming only ourselves, or those other adults who are consenting to participate in the action.

That would take away laws against drug use / sale (to adults), mandatory seat belt / helmet use (again for adults), etc. That alone would save us a ton of rss that we currently spend on enforcing those laws.

EP45 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 19, 2020 11:02 pm I am really trying to figure out a conservative position that does restrict a right without a good reason.

I can think of a few. Gay marriage being one example where I think you would have to really stretch to find a significant harm to society as a whole from 2 people of the same sex getting married. You mentioned drug use, but I'm not convinced that the harm from addiction to drugs that conservatives want to outlaw is really significantly greater than the harm from drugs those same people are fine with being legal (namely alcohol). Prostitution is another example. The line between a married man having a mistress that he showers with gifts (which is legal) and the same man who hires a high class escort is pretty gray, IMHO.

I describe myself as a Conservative Libertarian, because I am generally a libertarian of the Thomas Locke school of thought (people choose to establish governments to protect their rights and freedoms, not to restrict them). But where I differ from true Libertarian beliefs I tend to align with Conservatives as opposed to Liberals, hence the "Conservative" part.

IMHO both Conservatives and Liberals want to restrict the rights of the people they should be answering to. I think this is an inherent danger of politics and politicians who tend to get carried away with the exercise of power.