Presidential candidate Bob Barr talks a lot about how he, as a Libertarian, is the candidate who most supports individual liberty. Barr says he’s a consistent advocate for constitutionally-established freedoms. However, in practice, Barr seems to support liberty only for people who do things he personally approves of.
Non-religious Americans, for example, wouldn’t get much protection in Bob Barr’s vision. In lawsuits aimed at ending governmental funding and other support for the Boy Scouts, atheists note that only religious children are allowed to join. Kids are forced to take a solemn oath of duty to God, or they cannot join the government-supported organization.
Bob Barr doesn’t seem to think that’s a problem. He wrote an article in the Washington Times in 2004 complaining that gays and atheists shouldn’t object to the Boys Scouts discrimination against them.
The rest of us note that the government is not supposed to engage in any act supporting the establishment of religion, or interfering with the religious liberty of children. Supporting an organization that compels its child members to accept membership in religious theism clearly violates these aspects of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
Bob Barr, like most Libertarians, seems to actually support liberty only when it happens to run in accordance with his personal preferences. For true freedom-loving Americans, Bob Barr is a lousy choice for President.