Mediaboss Marketing

By Russell Moore March 31

In all the furor over Indianas controversial Religious Freedom Restoration Act, perhaps the answer to the culture war impasse wont be found in Indianapolis but in Pawnee. Pawnee, of course, is the fictional town inhabited by long-running NBC sitcom Parks and Recreation, which orbited around the often clashing visions of Parks director Ron Swanson and his crusading deputy Leslie Knope. The two could agree on little, but I think they could agree on Indianas RFRA as it originally passed, and so should we.

Ron Swanson and Leslie Knope are relevant to this discussion not despite the fact that they are fictional Hoosiers but precisely because they are. They stand in for two powerful impulses in American cultural and political life: leave me alone libertarianism and common good progressivism. Both of these strains are part of the rich heritage of religious freedom, and neither strain should go wobbly on that heritage now.

Swanson, of course, was the grumpy, just-this-side-of-cynical libertarian who feels guilty for working for the government. What he wanted to see done, more than anything, within his tiny towns parks department is for it to do just this side of nothing. He kept his money in gold, buried somewhere in the yard. His hatred of government regulations and government expenditures, of almost any kind, were second only to his hatred for skim milk (which he famously called water, lying about being milk).

Swanson, like most libertarians, probably would support same-sex marriage, if he supported any sort of government-recognized marriage at all. But his libertarianism wouldnt want the government dictating either the prohibitionor the celebrationof such unions.

The libertarian vision is one that recognizes that pluralism in the public square is not an evil to be stamped out by government fiat. And that vision is especially true when it comes to the most personal arena of a persons life: his or her conscience. We may disagree on how much government is necessary, but libertarians have consistently warned us that a government that takes upon itself the burden of paving over consciences is a government that can do anything.

The libertarian vision is true in the area of religious liberty both on the Right (when some have wanted state-written school prayers or mosques zoned out of existence) or on the Left (where now many want to force celibate nuns to pay for birth control insurance or force evangelical adoption agencies out of existence).

The federal RFRA and its counterparts in the states were designed to protect individual consciences from a Leviathan government. The point of RFRA, from the beginning, was to assert that unpopular religious views (whether of peyote-smoking native Americans, hijab-wearing Muslims or something similar) ought to be protected by more than just the whim of the majority.

Leslie Knope, on the other hand, was the office progressive, fueled by idealism about what government can do, if only given the chance. With her office filled with pictures of her women heroes from Madeleine Albright to Hillary Clinton, Knope wanted to break glass ceilings, to fill in sand pits and build parks for the sake of the flourishing of her community.

Now, as a liberal Democrat, Knope, too, probably would support same-sex marriage. But its hard to imagine that Knope would feel comfortable with the hysteria weve seen over the Indiana RFRA. The primary pressure to abandon this act, along with the (flat-out misrepresented) line that it is a freedom to discriminate bill has come from big corporate interests threatening to boycott the state.

Excerpt from:
Why Parks and Recreations Ron Swanson and Leslie Knope could agree on Indianas religious freedom law

Queensland civil libertarian Terry O'Gorman has asked the state's chief justice to clarify allegations he insulted colleagues and inappropriately interfered with judicial appointments.

In an open letter to Chief Justice Tim Carmody, the Queensland Council for Civil Liberties vice-president called for a fuller explanation of recent allegations levelled at Justice Carmody by a retiring judge.

Last week outgoing Supreme Court Justice Alan Wilson used his valedictory speech to declare the chief justice was not performing, and accused him of inappropriately interfering with the Court of Disputed Returns following the state election, among other claims.

Justice Carmody responded in a letter to barristers on Monday that said the allegations were a slur on his integrity and an inappropriate use of the forum of the court.

Mr O'Gorman's open letter, sent on Wednesday, demanded a better explanation of Justice Wilson's claims, including whether Justice Carmody had called other judges "snakes" and "scum".

The civil liberties lawyer, who has previously said the chief justice should consider resigning, also called for more detail of the circumstances surrounding Justice Carmody's intervention in the appointment of judges to the Court of Disputed Returns.

"The court is, on any view, now clearly deeply divided," Mr O'Gorman wrote.

"I was very disturbed by the remarks made by Wilson J at his valedictory late last week."

The letter comes amid revelations another senior judge was grateful for outgoing Justice Alan Wilson's comments.

Supreme Court Justice Roslyn Atkinson reportedly said in open court immediately after the retiring judge's valedictory ceremony that everything Justice Wilson said was true and she was "extremely grateful" to him for making the comments.

Read this article:
Carmody asked to explain judge's claims

Given that it's hardly been a controversy in nine other provinces, one might wonder why banning children from using tanning beds would be controversial here.

But the Saskatchewan Party seemed to struggle with imposing regulations prohibiting the use of indoor tanning beds for those under 18 years of age. In fact, just six days ago Health Minister Dustin Duncan told reporters his government wasn't about to follow Alberta's lead and pass such a law.

In fairness, Duncan did talk about "ongoing discussions" and maybe looking at Alberta's decision.

But protecting children's health should be an automatic no-brainer and tanning regulations should have been in place in Saskatchewan long before now. Or so the Sask. Party seemed to conclude as it announced Monday Saskatchewan youth would be prohibited from using tanning salons by this summer.

"Our government's goal is to protect the health of Saskatchewan residents," Duncan said in a news release.

"Our young people are particularly vulnerable to the effects of indoor tanning, and this is one way we can help them lower their risk of melanoma."

That said, maybe the Sask. Party government's news release still wasn't quite as assertive as it could have been.

It stressed the need to carefully monitor "developments on the issue" and make "every effort to be thoughtful about this issue, to gather as much information as possible, and to be aware of different perspectives before proceeding."

Regulations will be developed through consultations with interested stakeholders and government will "continue to support public education efforts aimed at raising awareness of the risks of indoor tanning, and encouraging people to make healthy lifestyle choices."

Really? Why would you need to throw a conciliatory bone to anyone? You just acknowledged: "Young people are particularly vulnerable to the effects of indoor tanning and this is one way we can help them lower their risk of melanoma." What is there still to consider?

View original post here:
Mandryk: Premier Wall battling libertarian views

For a New Ascendancy
TEXT: http://libertarianrealist.blogspot.com/2015/03/libertarian-bionationalism.html Libertarians need nations. No amount of theorizing about imaginary anarcho-capitalist legal agencies has...

By: Libertarian Realist

See the original post:
For a New Ascendancy - Video

Microphone in hand and standing atop the sound truck, the raspy-voiced protest leader jabbed his finger into the air shouting for the ouster of Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff, igniting wild cheers from the crowd below him.

"What Lula and Dilma have done shouldn't just result in their being banned from politics. It should result in them being in jail!" Kim Kataguiri yelled, denouncing Rousseff and her predecessor, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.

The March 15 demonstration was the largest Sao Paulo had seen in more than three decades, since 1984 protests demanding democratic elections after a long dictatorship.

But more surprising than the crowd of more than 200,000, according to the Datafolha polling and statistics agency, was the fact it was being led by Kataguiri, a skinny, 19-year-old college dropout, and other young Brazilian activists inspired by libertarianism and conservative free-market ideals.

The grandson of Japanese immigrants, Kataguiri is a social media star whose quirky videos skewer Rousseff and the ruling party's social welfare policies. His ascent as a protest figure has been rapid. Two years ago, when protests erupted across Brazil over corruption and poor public services, Kataguiri was a high schooler who avoided the unrest.

Today, he is the public face of the Free Brazil Movement, a growing force that is more focused than the 2013 unrest that expressed a wide range of middle-class anger. Brazil's new wave of protests are seen as a right-leaning movement clearly channeled against Rousseff and her Workers' Party.

A widening kickback scandal at Petrobras, the state oil company, is one of several complaints undermining the administration. Kataguiri and others are striking a chord with Brazilians fed up with soaring inflation, a high and growing tax burden, and those who blame government intervention for hobbling Brazil's economy, which grew just 0.1 percent last year and is expected to shrink in 2015.

"We are starting to see an agenda that is very politically driven and clearly against the federal government and President Dilma," said Carlos Melo, a political scientist at the Sao Paulo-based Insper business school. Compared to 2013, "these protests are presenting very different visions."

Kataguiri says he had a political awakening two years ago when he began questioning a classmate's position that a popular cash transfer program applauded by many experts around the globe was responsible for the expansion of Brazil's middle class and for lifting millions of citizens from poverty during the last decade.

He believed the credit instead should go to the country's commodities boom. "That's what has helped the poor," he said.

Read more:
Teen Libertarian Is Face of Brazil's Young Free-Market Right