OK Mike, This will be a long post, but I suggest on your behalf that you read and digest every word.

IMO the group who has survived for over a century is a little more deserving of the unambiguous label than the laissez-faire crazos who stole it 30 years ago. It'd be like if somebody had a totalitarian government butcalled themselves a Democratic Republic. I mean, you see how ridiculous and unlikely that is to occur, right.
The Libertarian party got it's name do to a political shift. Between the 60s and 90s, the republican party slowly started shifting to democratic ideals, while the democratic party started shifting extreme democrat and as of late, socialist ideals.
During this shift, the republicans who refused to give up republacy, stretched apart, therefore, having to eventually become their own party, thus, took up the title of Libertarian party. Anarchists have long existed in the Republican/Libertarian party, just as Communists have long existed in the liberal crowd.
The Libertarian party it's self has as many different levels and types as the liberal and democratic groups do.
I myself share similar views to Jessie Ventura and Charlie Condon, who themselves may be classified more as independents, but generally share mostly libertarian ideals.
During the early part of the 1800s, their was also a shift from republacy in to a UNION, which the republicans would not be part of. Unfortunately, in states that indorsed Republacy, their was allot of variable views shifting around ( much like in todays society ) about different political ideals, which included weather or not slavery should be ended by force, with industrial slavery although loosing popularity fast, being a large influence against it happening. This problem of course, brought about the American Civil War and the very last days of the United States as a republic.

They aren't fighting very hard, apparently. Every @@@@ news station I turn it to has some irate prick whining about the "liberal elite" on his own show.
First off, I have seen Righties get nailed to the wall by lefties on Fox News, so I am sure that all the rumors about their channel being rigged are all make believe.
Fox News, as you know, often just leaves the camera their during political debates and lets you see it live as it's happening, for what it is. This is one of the reasons why they can't do standard broadcasting. If someone starts screaming prophanity ( which I've seen happen ), you will hear it, if someone gets their head blown off, you'll see it.
Fox News is generally a neutral network, where they have liberals in their all the time in their debates but TBH, I have a hard time picturing someone NOT turning conservative with all the things that they witness, first hand.
It is true that Republicans and libertarians dominate Radio talk shows. If you want to know why, then just try listening to a liberal one. Many people don't like Rush Limbaugh, but think about how often liberals call him up and defeat him with facts and hard evidence?
Every time you turn your head, liberal talk shows are getting nailed hard, and that's probably why very few exist.
The Main stream media however ( ABC, NBC, CBS etc. is dominated by the liberal party. The liberal party also structures on emotional appearances, so they get allot of sheep following.

You know, it's funny sort of, but if you change a few words and you basically have one of Lenin's speeches during the Civil War.
Yeah, lets see who you sound like:

Yeah, it sure isn't a flaw that they tell millions of people in AIDS-ravaged third world countries not to use condoms because they'll burn in Hell, or that the condoms already have holes in them so there's no point in wearing them. I guess it was God's plan that they wash their vaginas out in the road with Clorox instead.
BEHIND every murder stood the same power which is responsible for this murder; behind these harmless insignificant fellow-countrymen who were instigated and incited to crime stands the hate-filled power of our Jewish foe, a foe to whom we had done no harm, but who none the less sought to subjugate our German people and make of it its slave - the foe who is responsible for all the misfortune that fell upon us in 1918, for all the misfortune which plagued Germany in the years that followed.
( ADAULPH HITLER. SPEECH OF FEBRUARY 12, 1936

Their is a modern campaign which drives people to wage conflict against peaceful religions ( Christianity being the utmost ) while protecting hostile ones ( Islamic Radicals.
In truth, this is not about what people have done in the name of religion in the past, but hatred towards them in the present, do to the barriers they hold up, which get in the way of many sinister agendas.
These sorts of people are responsible for the very worst of all conflicts.
People who do evil in the name of religion are no worse then those who do evil in the name of opposing religion. Both crowds are one the same.
If you get rid of all world religion, you will only have chaos. Religion is used as an excuse to do wrong only because it's their. If it's not their, just as much wrong will still be done in the name of something else, while the good things religions do will no longer be their.

Now, on what you actually said in that line, Their are weird people out their in every religion.
However, their is some truth in this. Sex was created for procreation, nor recreation. If it was meant for anything more, then sex would not be our method of procreation, or we would have a natural means of doing so without the risk of pregnancy, which we absolutely do not. The risk of pregnancy in withdrawal and timing is as present as is with condoms, and condoms really do fail quite often, and I have 2 nieces to show for it.
Sex is well abused today and to be honest, I don't have any sympathy for those who contract deadly diseases through recreational sex. If you're willing to play the game, then be ready to suffer the natural consequences. In addition, this certainly does not help on a spiritual note either.

I can understand why, being fed up with this kind of person, you joined an major organized religion.
My political views have very little direct involvement in my reason for getting involved with Christianity beyond the sense that political I stand for achieving good VS evil.

My reason for getting in to the Catholic Church is more severe and sophisticated then you can comprehend ( if you could, then you would have never said what you said. Enough that it's a decision that took me 4 years to make.
I considered Atheism for a large portion of the time. I also did so under the severity that if I could PROVE that their was no afterlife, I would immediately put a .44 Magnum bullet in my brain, and under the concept of Atheism, their is absolutely nothing wrong with doing that. Under the laws of Atheism, their IS NO Wright nor wrong, only what works and what doesn't.
Without afterlife, their is no reason to love or do good. It will all cease to exist in very short time, so the things you do to make people happy, are only good for the moment. The man who rapes and murders small children is guilty of no crime, since their is no such thing as crime, and his punishment is limited to what this world can do to him.
The guy about a year ago who kidnapped a little girl and was killed, never was punished under Atheist laws. His death was quick with little pain.
Your children, mother, father, loved ones etc. are all as disposable as the food in your fridge, as well as you yourself.
Fortunately, it goes much deeper then that.
Physics ( including energy ) is built up of Atoms, molecules and all their parts.
They in one theory are the minimum entity of physics. In another theory, their are even smaller, and smaller entities amongst them, that keep getting smaller and smaller.
Either way, for such to exist, their HAS to be distance between them. Nothing can move without distance. If their were no distance between them, then physics would all be a solid entity. So we know th at no matter HOW small physics gets, their has to be NON-PHYSICAL existence for physics to exist within.
Secondly, for anything to move, their must be power. If you set a cup on a table, their is distance for it to move, but it won't unless some sort of power, weather your hand, wind or gravitational or magnetic pull moves it.
So, our minimum entities that we know of do move,a nd they have their own mechanics as to how they do, but those mechanics are not capable of working without non-physical power.
Therefore, it is fact that we do have an alternative existence, which empowers physics ( including energy it's self.
Our bodies and brains are unable to function without this power generating them, and theoretically, as we live, both body and brain patterns are developed within it, generating our spirits. In other words, you could say that when we are born, our spirits are like blank CDs and that we are programmed throughout life.
This is just a base idea. Their is far more to just that much of it, and their are plenty of things that can be discovered about afterlife and the likeliness of it through this. As I said, I have studied this arena desperately for 4 years and my conversion to Catholicism did not come lightly, and even today, I am really very separate from the average Catholic, and keep my distance from about 80% of the community in order to keep from being driven nuts by the emotional prophiganda that soars between them.

Uh, ok. So it wasn't Constantine's conversion, the growing respect for human rights that came along with the early Christian reformation being in stark contrast to the brutality necessary to suppress and enslave millions of indigenous peoples, an overextended military complex that couldn't support itself in the long run, allowing the emperor to take practically half of the entire state budget, poorly organized industry and building, corrupt politicians and businessmen, the natural instinct for liberation within the foreign colonies, or the gluttonous self-interest of the ruling class: it was some ancient incarnation of the Green Party. I sure am glad you're so obsessed with "thural" research and could come to such a well-thought conclusion.
The very core of most of what you mentioned, is caused by these sort of people. In addition to some of the deeper details I have studied, I have also read quite a number of statements and interviews in the past with people who's lives revolve around studying this civilization, in addition to some interviews in Documentaries where they clearly compared the fall of the Roman Empire to the fall of the Soviet Union, and in about 70% of the cases, described the core part of the civilization as having most of the same characteristics as todays liberal party.
In short, laziness and cowardness brings countries down. I have never met a single liberal who proved to be anything but a coward, and the vast majority are not willing to go out and do a hard days work.

You mean like the opening credits to the Beverly Hillbillies? Wasn't Granny holding a shotgun in the jalopy?
No, try a 3rd of the country ( or more ).
Gun control does not and never did distinctly work to better the life of civilians. Statistics show both good and bad results for aftermaths of increasing and decreasing gun laws, but in virtually every case, the change in statistics is attributed to other things going on in society. In short, their is nothing to show that increased or decreased gun laws affects violent crime rates. It does however, affect outcomes as shown by statistics.
In areas where people are allowed to carry guns, their are more failed mug and violent crime attempts, usually resulting in no violence at all,since most people who carry guns won't shoot unless they have to, and for most criminals, staring down the barrel of a gun is more then enough to divert them from crime.
The important thing that gun rights do is keep governments form becoming tyrants. Giving up your gun rights is putting trust in your government to not become a tyrant, and saying that government office doesn't attract deceptive tyrants is like saying that strip clubs don't attract perverts.
Nazi Germany is a prime example of how important the right to keep and bare arms is.
BTW. The Nazi party practiced Socialism, which is the popular political practice of the liberal crowd.