Cancel Register Now Reset Password?
Advocates for Self Government Logo

1010 N Tennessee St
Suite 215
Cartersville, GA
30120-8528

Phone

(770) 386-8372

Fax

(770) 386-8373

Orders & Donations

(800) 932-1776

Quick Contact

info@theadvocates.org

Sign up for our Liberator Online Newsletter

The Liberator Online is full of expert tips and libertarian discussion. It’s the best way to stay current on breaking libertarian news.





Feed_icon_large

"Cross-Dressing" For Liberty

Published January 03, 2012 in Talking Points by Sharon Harris

What if you want to convince a conservative friend that the War on Drugs should end? Suppose you want to persuade a liberal relative that anti-gun laws are a bad idea?

You'll likely get nowhere talking with the conservative about civil liberties and the right of an individual to decide what goes into his body. And you may scare the liberal half to death if you start talking about bearing arms.

There's a better way. Dubbed "political cross-dressing" by persuasion coach and author Michael Cloud, it dramatically increases your chances of changing someone's mind. (And no, it doesn't require changing your clothes.)

The key is to tailor your message to your audience. Think about the specific concerns of the person you're talking to. Conservatives are typically concerned about law and order and about economic issues. Liberals are typically concerned about civil rights and taking care of those less fortunate.

Fortunately, libertarian solutions address ALL of these concerns.

To the conservative, talk about the tremendous cost of the drug war, the fact that it actually causes more crime, that it diverts law enforcement resources away from fighting violent crime, and that it actually makes drugs more available to children.

To the liberal, present the idea that guns can -- and often do -- protect the weakest among us. Talk about guns being "equalizers" for women, give examples of totalitarian governments disarming citizens, show gun ownership as a civil liberty.

So lead with your strong suit! You'll start out on the same page as your listeners, and they'll be much more open to seeing the issue from a different perspective.


Showing 7 Comments

Pubilshed February 07, 2012 by George

Gravatar Ultimately, the question abortion hinges on is not "is it a person?," but "who started it?" Personally, I could argue both sides, but I haven't fully formed my personal opinion on the topic yet. For example, in case of a rape, the aggressor initiated force, and the mother should be free to abort if she wishes. However, if it was consentual sex, the mother is in effect initiating force on the fetus by her actions. The child didn't ask to be conceived, but the parents forced it to happen. Thus, the question of abortion is really "Who initiated the force?" Therein lies the answer.

Pubilshed February 11, 2012 by John Ross

Gravatar Gotta Disagree George. The question of person-hood trumps the question of initiation. If someone is shooting at you from behind me, you do not have the right to shoot through me in order to defend yourself. The question of person-hood is an open question with people of good conscience on both sides. We all agree (I suspect) that somewhere between parental flirting and graduate school a collection of human cells becomes a "person". A fetus five minutes before birth is substantially identical to a baby five minutes after birth. What's so special about birth is that that is the moment where the entity passes from the sole jurisdiction of his or her parent into the shared jurisdiction of society. After that moment our rights and laws come into effect. Before that it's frankly none of our business.

Pubilshed February 21, 2012 by Bob Pegram

Gravatar This is a matter of innocent life or guilty life. The unborn baby is innocent and should not executed for the wrong behavior of somebody else. A rapist, on the other hand, should be executed.

Pubilshed March 01, 2012 by Dr. Mark

Gravatar article XIV of the constitution state, No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;nor shall any State deprive any Person of Life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any Person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Article V states, No Person shall be...be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; The issue is becomes when is a fetus a "person", only upon "birth"? Then one asks, what about partial birth abortion? which occurs during "crowning". Have you ever seen an ultrasound of a 12 week old fetus, arms and legs, moving around like you and I? In all aspects I am a Libertarian but there is no question as to when human life "begins". Neither do I want my under 18 year old child to have to see like sexes being physically affectionate in public or on televsion. Don't care what they do in private however. Yes, marriage, or coupling, IS between a man and a woman only. This is not my Christian belief as before I was Christian, and a Liberal, I recognized that there are no other Gay/Lesbian mammals on earth that I am aware of, therefore, naturally male and female were the intended sexual unit. But we all are sinners and no matter what your/my sins, we are not the judge, but should expect the natural order of things be expressed outwardly and not be recognized legally as "natural" when in fact it is not.

Pubilshed March 19, 2012 by Bert

Gravatar Life begins at conception. Rape and incest are always the topics brought up with this debate, but in reality, most abortions aren't related to these two categories. Obviously, those two situations are horrible and traumatic and there is no easy answer. The best answer may come from someone who faced that situation and perservered. Also, another argument is when life actually begins, e.g. conception, when the brain develops, arms and legs develop, full-term, etc. Well, all of our lives began as a tiny, little fertilized egg that looked nothing like a human being. Hopefully, we feel that we have given something to the world that no one else could've given it and maybe that little mass of tissue can do the same.

Pubilshed March 20, 2012 by MB

Gravatar As it is with the rest of our existence, this issue requires us as individuals to accept that we have an obligation to weigh the ethical, physical, and sometimes, legal consequences of our actions -- an obligation that has lost much of it's meaning in our 'modern' culture. If I am pregnant, and want to abort my pregnancy, I face these facts: a fertilized egg has no feelings but does have the potential to become my living child. At some point in the differentiation of tissues within the foetus, a heartbeat begins and nerve sensation (i.e. pain sensation) becomes a physical reality. If I wish to end the pregnancy, I need to give serious consideration to the facts that I am ending the development of my potential child and that I may be causing 'pain' to the developing embryo if I wait too long to abort the pregnancy. I personally believe that at the point in the pregnancy where the foetus has a heartbeat and nerve sensation, abortion should be viewed as ending the life of my child and any decision must consider the gravity of this act. I also believe that it is my personal right to end the pregnancy at any time prior to this, but that after this point, my health (mental and physical) must be an issue to make this choice morally and medically ethical. Physicians, for the most part, have abdicated their obligation to make their own ethical choices concerning performance of abortion. Most are too afraid of lawsuits and persecution that might ensue if they refuse to perform the procedure. So, as it is now, we are willing to let the government decide for us what is right and wrong regardless of even the physical realities of pregnancy. This, apparently, is what comes of abandoning our obligation to educate ourselves concerning these physical realities, relegating our Doctors to the role of voiceless technicians, and failing to hold ourselves accountable, individually and as a society, for our the consequences of our actions.

Pubilshed April 10, 2012 by Steve

Gravatar Boy, this got quickly off topic on how to plan your communications.

Add Comment

You commenting as a guest Sign in

Get your own Gravatar

Advocates for Self-Government 1010 N Tennessee St Suite 215 Cartersville, GA 30120-8528 Phone (770) 386-8372 Fax (770) 386-8373 Orders & Donations (800) 932-1776

Contents copyrighted © The Advocates for Self-Government, a nonprofit 501(c)(3) educational organization. Donations tax-deductible in U.S. All rights reserved.

Powered by Blacksnow Media