A Quote by John Anderson

I do not believe that the government should have its long nose poked into the private consensual relationships between people. — © John Anderson
I do not believe that the government should have its long nose poked into the private consensual relationships between people.
I don't believe the government should determine what a woman does in this area any more than it should tell a chief executive how to run a company. Personal and family matters, relationships between doctors and patients should not be within the purview of government.
We're not a socialist country, because the socialists believe in government ownership in the means of production, but the fascists believe that the government should have private ownership and the politicians should tell people how to run the businesses. So that's the route we seem to be going.
government has no business intervening in any consensual private behavior.
I am for a clear distinction between public and private life. I believe private matters should be regulated in private and I have asked those close to me to respect this.
Some kinds of government regulation of private consensual homosexual behavior may face substantial constitutional challenge.
I believe that the vast majority of people that are unfaithful are monogamous in their beliefs. The ones who are not monogamous in their beliefs either live in poly relationships or consensual non-monogamous relationships, or they have divorced. If it's very bad, then people don't stay married these days in the West. They can be married and have their family, but they want something else - they want something that they don't have in their lives, or simply to be someone that isn't who they are in the context of their marriage.
We should distinguish at this point between "government" and "state" ... A government is the consensual organization by which we adjudicate disputes, defend our rights, and provide for certain common needs ... A state on the other hand, is a coercive organization asserting or enjoying a monopoly over the use of physical force in some geographic area and exercising power over its subjects.
I believe that "government", as we know it today, should pull out of most things except for law enforcement and justice, national defense and foreign policy, and let the private sector, a "Grameenized private sector", a social-consciousness-driven private sector, take over their other functions.
We believe being in long-term, deeper relationships with artists is a great strategy, we will be 100% pursuing it. There has never been a debate with Michael Cohl as to whether we should be in the Madonna business or be in long-term relationships, or be in more rights with artists.
I believe the private sector and small businesses drive our economy, and that means the federal government should work to ensure the private sector is as robust as possible.
We do not want to live in a theocracy. We should maintain that barrier and government has no business telling someone what they ought to believe or how they should conduct their private lives.
[T]he crucial question is not, as so many believe, whether property rights should be private or governmental, but rather whether the necessarily 'private' owners are legitimate owners or criminals. For ultimately, there is no entity called 'government'; there are only people forming themselves into groups called 'governments' and acting in a 'governmental' manner. All property is therefore always 'private'; the only and critical question is whether it should reside in the hands of criminals or of the proper and legitimate owners.
My political philosophy as a libertarian says that government has no business intervening in any consensual private behavior. My professional ethic as a thinker and writer, however, says that self-knowledge is our ultimate responsibility
Who wants good people in government? Good people should be in the private sector. Helping us out, helping themselves out in the private sector. We want schmoes in government. We want people who can't find the doorknob. Why waste productive people, as well as looting the taxpayer?
Temporary nationalization of the banks that are in very bad shape would mean basically that the government is the temporary owner. I always believe that the government should focus on its comparative advantages, and banking is not one of them. It should, therefore, if it nationalizes banks, sell them back to the private sector.
I believe that most people would like to cooperate in reducing waste, but to encourage them, the national policy should be clear, well advertised, and consistent. Even within Greater London, there is a huge discrepancy between council policies. I believe a national waste management initiative should be designed and implemented by government.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!