It occurs to me

Originally posted by MaggieL
The issue for me isn't whether Starchild thinks legal enforcement of that kind of belief is or ever will be practical. The issue is that sie thinks it would be OK to do so, especially considering sie bills hirself as libertarian.

I meant to respond to this in the first one but forgot, so I'll do it here.

I don't really see (from what you've posted) how you can draw the conclusion that she "thinks it would be OK to do so". Admittedly, I am unfamiliar with Starchild, but it seems to me that what she's saying is "Look, I'm vegetarian, and I don't support the killing of animals. However, I know that I can't stop this right now, and even if I could, it would have serious repercussions on the economy and whatnot. So, while I support gun owners' rights for a number of reasons, hunting isn't one of them. Just wanted to clarify." Obviously, that's just my take. It seems to parallel what I would say, if I ran for office (in 2016, BTW), about abortion. "Look, I appreciate life, and I don't think I could ever have one of my children aborted. However, I know that I can't stop this and that it's not right for me to make that kind of decision. So while I don't support abortion, I won't do anything to stop it. Just wanted to clarify." To me, honestly, it seems as though she's taking the wellbeing of the public into her stance, and that's infinitely valuable to have in a representative.