If one prefers the military process, there is a solution, but it’s not to pretend that my first sentence isn’t true. Because there’s always a persecuted whimsical subset of “all men” — perhaps even intentionally artificially created — that any one of us can belong to, and that 5 can rule. Or one, for that matter. Personally, I’d prefer not having to cope with figuring out what all those subsets could be in preparation for this time every year. Best just to adhere to the rule of law. “All men”…

Although I may disagree with a few of your particulars, I agree with your comment as a whole.

We are not a strictly Libertarian–although I’m a long-time reader/subscriber to Reason and used to regularly read Liberty–some of the Libertarian views, IMO, would work great in a perfect world, but run into problems in a world populated by both good and evil people.

BUT we’re not strictly conservative, either. Our views on the Drug War, in particular, don’t win us many conservative plaudits. This is puzzling, in that conservatives are supposed to be for smaller government, also.

BUT, we are definitely rabidly free speech. And that’s why comments such as yours are welcome all the time.

Thanks for taking the time to stop by and leaving your comment.

You have been reading the libertarian posts about how the next good decision needs to eliminate the death penalty for “treason”.

The main reason why the conservative judge Kennedy (who thinks for himself more often than the social conservative members) made his decision, was because males in the USA these days are constantly accused falsely of rape.

Now the particular 2 child rapists who were affected by this decision were clearly guilty of incredible violence, with tons of evidence to prove they did what they were convicted of….but there were only 2 rapists affected after all.

And you cannot say that the anti-libertarian governor Bobbi Jindal was NOT grandstanding for political purposes (never a good reason to execute anyone).

Would you have someone executed for sleeping with a 17 year old (legal in most states and countries)? Would you have someone even jailed for that? How about the 2 men in California who are in jail because a girl who looked 18 said she was 18 on MySpace and there was every reason to believe she was 18…but she was shockingly 13? You would say the men should remain even one more day in jail? Why? Because you don’t think men should be dating even 18 year olds (for instance if they are over 30)?

I am sorry but this topic does not work to convince anyone who is not an anti-male social conservative or feminist…to vote libertarian.

The decision was meant to protect men from false accusations in the future. Also, a government of a feminist US state (or a evangelical US state) could easily start executing men who slept with 16 year olds while it would remain not even a crime in the next state.

My attitude is the conservative attitude here. The Men’s Rights Movement (MRM) is not amused at the right adopting the radical feminist desire to castrate men accused of rape. The feminists have gotten evanglists to mistakenly internalize the issue as one of their own over the past 20 years.

Check out http://www.mensnewsdaily.com to keep track of the highly conservative MRM.