August 16, 2016 Show with C. Jay Engel on “A Christian Libertarian Economist’s Answers to: ‘Can We Rescue the Economy of the USA?'”

The Program Opens With Proverbs 27:17 and the Purpose of the Show

Live from the historic parsonage of 19th century gospel minister George Norcross in downtown Carlisle, Pennsylvania. It's iron sharpens iron a radio platform on which pastors Christian scholars and theologians Address the burning issues facing the church and the world today.

Proverbs 27 verse 17 tells us iron sharpens iron so one man sharpens another. Matthew Henry said that in this passage quote. We are cautioned to take heed whom we converse with and directed to have in view in conversation To make one another wiser and better.

It is our hope that this goal will be accomplished over the next hour. And we hope to hear from you the listener with your own questions. Now here's our host. Good afternoon.

Cumberland County, Pennsylvania. And the rest of humanity living on the planet Earth. Who are listening via live-streaming? This is Chris Arns and your host of iron sharpens iron wishing you all a happy Tuesday on this 16th day of August 2016.

J. Gresham Machen, Reformed Libertarianism, and the Guest Introduction

You know the great 20th century Presbyterian J. Gresham Machen Said everywhere there rises before our eyes the specter of a society where security if it is attained at all Will be attended at the expense of freedom where the security that is attained will be the security of fed beasts in a stable and Where all the high aspirations of humanity will have been crushed by an all-powerful state as I said that's dr. J. Gresham Machen founder of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church one of the theological heroes During the fundamentalist modernist controversy.

That happens to be also a quote at the top of the reformed Libertarian Facebook page and we're gonna be finding out more about reformed libertarianism or paleo libertarianism. From our guest today who we have for the very first time on iron sharpens iron CJ Engel who is the founder and editor of reformed libertarian comm host of the aforementioned reformed libertarian Facebook page.

He is a registered financial advisor in Northern, California where he lives with his wife and children and He also is a paleo libertarian. We're gonna find out more about specifically how that is different from Many who wear the label libertarian today today?

Our specific theme is a Christian libertarian economists answer to can we rescue? The economy of the United States of America and it's my honor and privilege to welcome you To iron sharpens iron for the very first time.

CJ Engel. It's my pleasure and let me right off the bat. Give our email address for those of our listeners who want to join us on the air with a question of their own. It is Chris Arnzen at gmail .com.

That's ch r is a r n z n at gmail .com and please give us your first name your city and state and your country of residence if you live outside of the USA and We would love to hear from you. You you may remain anonymous if it makes you feel more comfortable.

But we would prefer it if you at least identify yourself by first name city and state and country. Well, first of all CJ if you don't mind before we even get into the main theme at hand. Tell us something about your own Christianity how you came to faith in Christ and how you became theologically reformed as a Christian.

From Calvinist Leanings to the 1689 London Baptist Confession

Dark thinking as a from a reformed old children where theology was at the Center of our education and so it's something that has been with me for the entirety of my life thus far I I started becoming more and more interested in you know, sort of a Calvinist not quite reformed Perspective in high school as I became more interested in researching on the Internet.

Everybody listening to the show is more than aware of the fact that there's been sort of a resurgent a resurgent Of attention to the Calvinist dictates and I was part of that those, you know young people under the age of 20 that started researching and looking and Discovering and making theology my own and coming to my own conclusions that may or may not be the same.

Of my parents it was in it was in college later on that I began to realize that there was a distinction between You know reform theology proper and Calvinism, which might be considered a subset of reform theology.

I began, you know pouring into the confessions of faith And you know the Westminster confession and I wasn't sure what the difference was between that the Paedo-Baptist and the cradle-baptist. But along the way I began to notice the differences and kind of theology and how that has an impact on You know the covenant membership of younger Younger parts of the family and so I began studying, you know, these things like I reached the conclusion That the the London Baptist confession of faith 18 or 19.

So for the last six years, I've been a reformed back to 1689 confession of faith.

Well that you have a brother who shares the same confession right here. I'm a member of Grace Baptist Church in Carlisle, Pennsylvania, and we also adhere to the 1689 London Baptist Confession. In fact every church That I have been a member of.

Well This is the actually the second church that I have been a member of since I became a born-again believer in Christ in the 1980s. Adhered to this 1689 confession. I was raised Roman Catholic prior to my salvation so it's great to have a fellow reformed Baptist on the program.

And so when in your life as now you are a Christian when did this fascination with politics arise and Specifically when did you start to gravitate towards? Libertarianism or more specifically paleo libertarianism and we'll have you define that distinction in a moment.

But tell us something about the the political Interests that developed in your life.

How College Studies Led to Political and Economic Interests

Well, that's an easy one because I remember the road so distinctly. I went to a small private Christian college out here in Northern California just outside of Sacramento and I went to school Thinking I was going to be a pastor and attend seminary and so I majored in Bible and theology.

I also took a or attempted to take a minor in business administration. Because I wanted to have some practical skills and I know You know running a household and running a church requires some of those things besides I was in the first class and economics was definitely not for me and I decided that I needed to Focus more else to be fiance and now wife was in public policy.

That was her major and she was studying more theoretical things such as government Theory politics and things of that nature and I was jealous at the time of seeing her workload. Looked over an envy and decided that I was going to switch majors.

And so it's kind of a funny story that I It looks like they chased my wife around the academic. And I suppose you could say that as I got more into these classes I began to really fascination with these things.

You know, especially the government and political fear quit my first major or minor. Excuse me a business administration because of the economic side of things and by the time I hit my senior year My senior dissertation was on the Federal Reserve, which is the United States Central Bank.

And so that is economic land galore. So funny how you I went in with one perspective in my set and came out with something totally else. But that's I mean my college years were really the fundamental time in my life when I began to look into these.

I'm the type of person that doesn't stop until I've solved all the issues. I see everything as a jigsaw puzzle. And I'm gonna make sure that it's still senior years when I graduated and had much more time to read books than I do now Having you know re-education in some ways Into my brain and I've been very blessed by studying these things and my wife is very appreciative of the fact that I now have An outlet on my website and she can sleep at night without hearing me talk.

Well, praise God for that. And so let's come to a definition of Libertarianism because I know just from speaking with many Christians who Are very passionate in one way or the other about This upcoming presidential election that there seems to be a lot of ignorance as to what libertarianism is.

People equate Libertarianism with liberalism very often and not that they would view the libertarians as Fiscally liberal. They seem to have some kind of an understanding that Libertarians are for small government, but I think that there is some confusion about.

A.

What Libertarianism Is, and Why Party Labels Confuse the Issue

Libertarians endorsement of Socially and morally unbiblical practices and ideologies and the government's involvement Over what we are to think say and do. I think that that's where a lot of the Confusion lies, but if you could in your own words describe libertarianism and perhaps even Define as a backdrop to that.

Capitalism and socialism. The confusion is not entirely the fault of those who are confused on the term libertarianism and part of the problem, of course is the fact that libertarianism as it has become more popular has Reflected the trends of the masses and those conservative Christians like ourselves and like many of the people we look up to.

In our circles, you know, including most eminently who's an individual who's been very critical of libertarianism would be out older and When he looks out and looks for the definition of libertarianism, he Immediately comes to the Libertarian Party, which is you know, an official institution or entity that runs You know people for the nomination, you know at state and national offices.

And you know, they look at the people that are representing libertarianism first. Confusion that comes about is there's a failure to make a distinction between libertarian theory independent of the party and The party itself and this would be it this would be the same as confusing the meaning of Democracy as a theory that has been in existence since ancient Greece and the Democratic Party today.

If we define all of our theories in terms of the parties that wear that label We're not going to get very far in discovering, you know, what is true and what what doctrines are actually represented by the label.

Oh, yeah, of course. I'm sorry. I'm sorry if I was interrupting you. I was just going to say it's just like judging Republicanism. By Rudy Giuliani, who is a spokesman for the Republican Party and was a mayor for New York City for the Republican Party.

And he is Someone who is pro abortion. He's pro Homosexual rights. He marched in the gay rights parade. So therefore if you want to use the same kind of broad brushing people should look at the Republican Party and say These people are just all entirely in favor of abortion and homosexual activism.

Yeah, exactly, you know, it's the common confusion of or you know defining Defining Christianity by Joel Osteen or someone that wears the label. We have to always draw a distinction between the definitions that we're referring to and An institution or entity or individual who wears that label?

So that's the first thing I would say. The second thing I would say is it's simply that libertarianism has become corrected you know in its in its formulations over the years in an internal sense, so those who have described themselves as libertarians have internal debate about what it means and Of course general sentiment if the greater masses are going to refer to you know homosexuality or To identify liberal are not going to get as much traction and we see this all the time in Christian circles as well.

Those who define Christianity in a more liberal less biblically centered way are going to gain traction for the Because it's logical that Traction is gained by it. And so that's what I'm sorry of them as it is confused because most people look at well How are the masses defining it?

Well, if you know anything about me, I don't much care for how the masses define things I get to the root of the matter and a lot of times my general tendency is to dissent whether that's socially religiously philosophically.

Now when I was a little kid I became fascinated.

With the study of dinosaurs and fossils. So therefore I knew that a paleontologist referred to something that was very old ancient and so on. So. What does that mean in regard to paleo libertarianism?

How are you different? And how is that? Stream of thought. That ideology different than what is commonly known as libertarianism today.

Yes.

Define libertarianism in a positive sense. So let me do that and then I can sure then I can articulate what we're trying to. What we're trying to communicate when we use that Italianism a legal theory that has political ramifications, but it's a legal theory and fundamental root.

It holds that that no man is allowed to initiate aggression against the property of any other human being and if he does so then He is he is acting in a criminal way so when we think back to the classical liberals or the writers of you know, The Declaration of Independence things like that.

We always hear this phrase a man has a right to his life liberty and property that they chew the weeds and get their hands dirty and they define things like What is a right and what is property and what is life and things like that?

And what they come up with is that what we mean when we say that man has a right to his practice anybody Free that holds nobody's allowed to do that. You're not allowed to initiate aggression or it's fundamentally a legal theory.

And then what the libertarian does is he applies it not only to the general citizens. But also to the government a certain amount of money from you in order that he may pay for the health care. I'm to an individual.

How does that how I want to keep that do whatever you want think whatever you want. There's it's to morality or anything like that. So if they kind of they did what they said, no, no, no, you you can't we can't do that.

People refer to it as libertarianism is and since having to do with aggression. That means that libertarianism work with the social conservatives. We can I Koreans are allowed libertines or the social libertarians or you know The new libertarians that are anti-conservative libertarians in a bit social conservative.

We have nothing again charism and be against libertarian.

Now, I know this is before your time, but I'm sure that you must have heard along your studies some something about Barry Goldwater who would have been in the 1960s a presidential candidate and he is very often identified as a Conservative libertarian, would you think that that is an accurate label of him?

And why would you only go back as far as the 1980s in regard to paleo libertarianism?

Well paleo libertarianism is an empirical historical phenomenon and that's when the label was created. Okay, he did by it was created by a set of people to it was created by Murray Rothbard and Lou Rockwell.

Those are the ones that came up with the name and they actually created that name based on a distinction in conservative circles by a Paul Godfrey did. If he said, okay, there's all these new and lobbyists that are coming out calling themselves conservatives.

But we need to distinguish between this new conservatism and the old school Conservatism of the 1920s and 30s. So what he did was he said, okay. There's the neo-conservative. What Lou Rockwell and Murray Rothbard did is they said, okay.

Well in the same way that Paul Godfrey is doing this. We're also going to make the thing out regarding Barry Goldwater a that he is being leaning a history of American conservatism in the 20th century.

He was actually part of what Murray Rothbard called the new right the post World War two right and the right that was distinct from the what he calls the old right FDR's New Deal and U .s. And true Goldwater was part of the new right which is distinct from the old right and in World War two is that dividing line.

So.

Localism, Nationalism, and the Moral Divide Between Paleo and Neo Libertarians

Going back to the the contrast between paleo libertarianism and Just modern libertarianism, which just typically goes by the title libertarian like Gary Johnson Who is running for president of the United States? would this be primarily a Matter of Social and moral values that would be the dividing line or is it something more?

Does it even go beyond that into? The military or even economic policies. What would be the contrast there other than the moral and social values?

Yeah, that's a really that's a really good question. And this is something that I actually attempted to take on in a recent essay of mine. There's various factors that you can see, you know, things like definitions are Somewhat objective, you know, you could define things.

However, you want but the thing that I've come up with is You know, not only is there these coach on there's also two other primary that would make them distinct from. You know what you might call neo-libertarianism you know, two of them include Localism versus Nationalism in a in a you know in a non accusatory sense the word by nationalism I don't mean like fascism or something.

I just mean as Distinct from from localism the the paleo libertarian. They really want to focus on community orientedness Local of the influence that the church has on the immediate neighborhoods around them things like that.

Whereas I've noticed that the neo-libertarian all they care about Is is You know implementing what they consider some ways on some issues is very much more libertine. They're focusing on changing policy from Washington.

So a good example of this would be the gay marriage debate. The paleo libertarian with federal government issuing a mandate redefining marriage at a national level. But the the neo-libertarians they do Praise that because they think that it's progress toward a more in there according to their definitions.

You know, so we can get married according to whatever definition I want to liberate the paleo libertarians is any nationalization of the definition. They want things to be Local that would be one issue is the national it's going to be more prosperous Retardant and that is against, you know, the moral code and and we we do a lot of these criminal actions.

Yeah, excellent.

The Show Breaks for Sponsors

We're going to go to a break right now. And if anybody would like to join us on the air with a question of your own We already have several people waiting to have their questions asked and answered. But if you'd like to join them with a question of your own our email address is chris arnzen at gmail .com.

That's chris Arn z n at gmail .com. And as I said earlier, please give us your first name your city and state and your country of residence if you live outside of the USA and You may remain anonymous if it makes you feel more comfortable, but don't go away.

We are going to be right back after these messages with CJ Engel. Hi, I'm Chris Arnzen host of iron sharpens iron radio here to tell you about an exciting offer from world magazine My trusted source for news from a Christian perspective.

Try world at no charge for 90 days and get a free copy of RC Sproul's book. Relationship between church and state. I Rely on the world because I trust the reporting. I gain insight from the analysis and world provides clarity to the news stories that Really matter.

I believe you'll also find world to be an invaluable resource to better understand critical topics with a depth. That's simply not found in other media outlets. Armed with this coverage world can help you to be a voice of wisdom in your family and your community.

This trial includes bi-weekly issues of world magazine On-scene reporting from world radio and the fully shareable content of world digital simply visit Wmg .org. Forward slash iron sharpens to get your world trial and dr. Sproul's book all free.

No obligation with no credit card required. Visit world news group at wmg .org. Forward slash iron sharpens today.

Charles Haddon Spurgeon once said give yourself unto reading. The man who never reads will never be read. He never quotes will never be quoted. He will not use the thoughts of other men's brains. Bruce Lee has no brains of his own.

You need to read. Solid ground Christian books is a publisher and book distributor who takes these words of the Prince of preachers to heart. The mission of solid ground Christian books is to bring back treasures of the past to minister to Christians in the present and future and To publish new titles that address burning issues in the church and the world.

Since its beginning in 2001 solid ground has been committed to publish God-centered Christ exalting books for all ages. We invite you to go treasure hunting at solid ground books. Calm. That's solid dash ground dash books calm and see what priceless Literary gems from the past or present you can unearth from solid ground.

Solid ground Christian books is honored to be a weekly sponsor of iron sharpens iron radio.

Thriving financial is not your typical financial services provider. As a membership organization. We help Christians be wise with money and live generously every day. For the fourth year in a row We were named one of the world's most ethical companies by the ethosphere Institute a leading international think-tank dedicated to the creation Advancement and sharing of best practices in business ethics.

Contact me Mike Gallagher financial consultant at 7 1 7 2 5 4 6 4 3 3 Again 7 1 7 2 5 4 6 4 3 3 to learn more about the thriving difference.

Finances and generosity. That's the private story.

If you just tuned us in our guest today for the first 90 minutes of the program is CJ Engel founder and editor of reformed libertarian calm post of the reformed libertarian Facebook page registered financial advisor in Northern California and a self-defined or self-described Paleo libertarian and he is addressing a Christian libertarian economists answers to can we rescue the economy of the United States of America?

We're also talking about libertarianism in general and Contrasting it with paleo libertarianism and our email address is Chris Arnzen at gmail .com. Chris Arnzen at gmail .com. Before I go to Some of our listeners who have questions I just wanted to ask you about a couple of things in regard to some things you were mentioning before the break in.

You were contrasting the you were giving an example of a contrast between someone like Gary Johnson and the Libertarian Party and a paleo libertarians understanding of marriage and how the modern libertarians like Johnson Seem to be very joyful over the federal government's redefining of what marriage is opening up the gates to homosexuals to participate in Legally recognized same-sex marriages which obviously will eventually lead to all different kinds of Marriages like a return of polygamy perhaps.

I can't imagine how that would not eventually become legal again in this nation.

And.

Other types of even more disturbing marital relationships.

And.

You were saying that one of the contrasts is between Federal or local. Would this be a similar issue to federal and state rights? Contrast.

You know, I call them the national libertarians. And again, I'm not what we would as a matter of you know. The most central government can have the most impact on the most amount of people and so they want that government.

Be it the national government or even via the the Internet and international government, you know. They focus on, you know, what can those governments do to make things better for you know. Whatever definition of liberty, you know, they're employing which might include things like, you know so-called legalization of gay marriage.

But the you know, they are libertarian or you know. Just that the old-school libertarian Governments are safer when you when you take things to a national international level and you focus on policymaking in those arenas you would invite.

You know big brother or big government in and so many other areas. In the economy in social engineering and education and you know various other bureaucracies. What the appeal of taking things at a much broader level is going to be dangerous in the long run to individual and local?

Sovereignty, I think that there's a lot to be said about these distinctions the fact that you know, the the localists and the you know, the Secessionist the nullification. Advocates, you know those that those that are willing to say no to federal government overreach.

You know, all of that comes from the United States Terry and appreciates. You know more localist movements and more emphasis on local politics and communities and they do a friend of mine.

I don't know if you're familiar with William Norman Grigg.

But.

William Norman Grigg at one time was the editor for the New American magazine. He describes himself as a Christian constitutionalist libertarian and. He during a discussion years ago as my guest on iron sharpens iron was saying that he is not in favor of Same-sex marriage, but he does not believe the government has any place being involved in our marriages.

Now I can have some sympathy with that, but I don't know how that would protect Spouses from bigamists and things like that if the government was completely removed from a marital issue. But but beyond that if we want to just put that aside.

If if we were to agree with that. Understanding what I what I don't understand about somebody like Gary Johnson and modern libertarians who were in favor of same-sex marriage. Is that it is enforcing legally?

The recognition of Same-sex marriage as a marriage when there are citizens of this country perhaps even the majority who reject that notion and because of cherished religious beliefs. View that as something that's an abomination and an evil and wicked and it's one thing if your neighbor.

Chooses to have some kind of ceremony with his same-sex partner or her same-sex partner that is called a marriage. It's one thing if that happens but when we who are Christians are forced to view that legally as a marriage and it involves our own lives in some way and especially if it involves perhaps our livelihoods and Whatever kind of a business that we may have.

That seems to be the the opposite understanding to me of a libertarian that they would. Want the government to legally declare something as binding? Such as a same-sex marriage it if I don't know if I'm making sense to you.

But if you could comment on that best as you can.

Marriage, Government, and the Libertarian View of Adultery and Bigamy

Yeah.

People can find it by searching propaganda phraseology gay marriage legalization and What I pointed out in this short post is that the whole idea of the movement of marriage legalization or gay marriage legalization Is actually propaganda language because two people coming together having a ceremony calling it Whatever they want.

It's not illegal people can do that. You can go right now down to You know Under some right park and you can you can do this thing and you can call it a marriage. There's nothing illegal about that. Happening is is it's just not licensable out in in liberal circles and in some Neolibertarian circles to make it licensable.

But as you know a paleo libertarian or I would call a true libertarian There's no right to have a license. You know that we can't there's there's no natural right that we have to go to the government and demand that they give us a marriage license whether that's for Gay marriage or even traditional biblical marriage, you know I can't go down and demand that the government give me a license or you know, my fiance and I right now.

There's no right that we have to do that. And so the whole the whole movement is it's just a cultural. You know, I would call it part of a cultural war getting the masses to change their language and focusing on politics.

But it's all you know, it might even be called a sham. You know, it's just all this fake movement. It doesn't actually matter because there's nothing illegal about people doing things and you know in this area calling it What they want so that that would be my comment on that.

No, I don't know if you are familiar with my friend.

William Norman Grigg. Oh, yes. Wonderful journalist. Okay. Do you agree with his position that the government has no should have no involvement in marriages. To begin with I.

Do agree with yeah, that would be the libertarian position that there's no but let me clarify. You know something on this. There's no role for the government. Two people are married. So that would be the libertarian position.

There's no I think there's a complete would it's completely a legitimate marriage if two people come together without the government. And in History passed when two people came together and there was no I believe that those people were legally married in the eyes of God.

I don't think a government is needed in the equation of marriage. However, if there is some sort of contest or arbitration needed on Property if there's some sort of dispute when it comes to you know, those types of things well, that's the role of the agency in society that has the ability to arbitrate between you know conflict in that way and so there's there's a debate belongs to The public square or whether it belongs to the church and the church has not been given the right to oversee marriage.

That would be the Catholic view. The Calvinist view is that marriage is a covenant and it's a covenant between a man his wife. And God the church has nothing to do with it. So the the only rule that the government would have a related dispute or arbitration.

That's what the government would come in and and try to resolve those things. But when it comes to the definition of marriage itself, there's no need for the government to Define it or verify it or license it or anything like that.

No, you would not think that the government should be able to ever step in to press charges and perhaps even arrest and fine or Imprison a bigamist who behind his wife's back had a secret marriage and a secret family and that type of the thing.

Well, see, yeah, that would be. I think those types of libertarian theory of Contracts and I wrote a lot of article in this if anyone's listening and they want to write this down and look it up. I wrote should adultery be legal a libertarian view and so this this comes right into the very same thing about whether you know You know, whether there's a government role in preventing adultery or giving consequence to an adulterous Partner in the relationship and you might find interest in reading this yourself but the conclusion that I come to is I don't see a natural need for the government to Prevent this type of thing.

If there's any property involved and there's any breach of contract Then the government would have to come in and enforce that but no if if a man has a secret marriage He does something like that that can be resolved between the those three individuals some witnesses Parts of the community and that needs to be Resolved in a peaceful manner, but there's no need for the government to come in and use force because that's all.

Yes.

The only tool that the government has that's the only role that they would play if they were to play anything. If everything else beyond force can be handled without the government. So if you can think of a situation in which what is needed then?

Yes, you could make a case for the government being involved there in an adulterous self and I have a carefully reasoned.

Questions from Germany, Michigan, and Long Island

Okay, let's go to some of our listeners. This is the first time in quite a while that we have had a listener Submit a question from Germany, but we have a listener in Heidelberg, Germany. And I'm sorry if I'm mispronouncing your name, but it's Amani or Omni a M a n I.

Amani from Heidelberg writes with so many questions about the non libertarian views of Gary Johnson. What are your views of Darryl Castle. Not the Constitution Party. I guess he's asking you to contrast Darryl Castle between Him as a person and and the party he's running under.

I'm not really sure why he worded it that way. I'm also Find it interesting that he viewed he identified Gary Johnson as a non libertarian. But if you could answer as best you can the question.

Yeah, you know, unfortunately, I haven't taken much time to read to dig into you know.

His positions on things. But you mean I've read about him. You mean Darryl Castle or Gary Johnson? Oh, yeah.

He seems like a great guy and it seems to me You know in this Controversial, but he said it too. He's more libertarian than the libertarian candidate. So I am I I have I think I think he's a great guy, but you know, Murray Rothbard.

You know, who's one of the premier or preeminent? Libertarian theorists in the libertarian movement, you know, he once noted the fact of it and and I think Christian. He judges self-labeled libertarian far more partially and you know rigorously than he would a you know.

A non-libertarian or someone who calls himself a constitutionalist for the non-libertarian, you know focus of Libertarian appreciation for someone like that would be is he going to increase or decrease the Liberty?

You know the road to Liberty and I think Darryl Castle is someone who? Wants to uphold the Constitution much more, you know, it's a huge restraint on you know Government God do think that his you know tendencies are in the right direction and unfortunately I haven't studied him, you know as much as I should have but the other part of that is we need to judge Libertarians or self-labeled libertarian much more harshly because they're the ones that are representing or Declaining to represent so when you have someone like Gary Johnson We need to look for even in in Castle and point those out and you know.

Point out the various ways in which he is better than the Republicans and the Democrats. But if you have someone like Gary Johnson who had a whole bunch of you know, a litmus Series of things that can be said against him and contradictions with a libertarian ideology.

We need to be all over that because those are the things that people are Interpreting as libertarian and a good analogy of this is Christianity there are certain people who wear the label of Christian or even even wear the label of Reformed and yet they dissent in some very serious areas from reformed or Christian theology.

And those people need to be You know rigorously as being Because why because people interpret those things as Christianity and it's very misleading can be said about libertarian. If there's someone that's claiming to be a libertarian like like Gary Johnson and you know The whole bunch of things that can be said against him.

I think we need to be do you agree with Darrell Castle's assessment?

Of himself that he is more libertarian than Gary Johnson is.

Well, that's I said, I don't have the knowledge. But I think in some areas and you know, I think I think what motivated that comment of his was toward Gary Johnson about whether or not a business is allowed to discriminate based on you know religious issues or Decide how position on this thing Gary Johnson does that right?