“The 300 and their brothers-in-arms were not only Greek heroes, but ours as well. Yet the most absurd —and obscure —argument against this proposition contended that the Spartans could not have been fighting for individual liberties, since they themselves were part of a militaristic, collectivist, statist society. The Spartans fought so that their women and children would not be enslaved and they not slaughtered by the Persians. The right not to be slaughtered and the right not to be enslaved —what, pray tell, are they, if not the ultimate individual rights? To claim members of a flawed society cannot fight for individual liberties is a non sequitur.”

The excerpt is from my new WorldNetDaily column, “‘300′: Not A Top Pick With Metrosexuals.” (WND’s title.)

I hope this addresses some of the critical comments BAB readers leveled at me in an earlier discussion. My libertarian critics (at least those who are on the right side of the Lincoln debate) might want to consider, in this context, whether they would philosophically disqualify members of the Confederate States as legitimate defenders against indisputable Northern aggression, because some Southerners owned slaves (384,000 whites out of more than 8 million, to be precise).

“The 300 and their brothers-in-arms were not only Greek heroes, but ours as well. Yet the most absurd —and obscure —argument against this proposition contended that the Spartans could not have been fighting for individual liberties, since they themselves were part of a militaristic, collectivist, statist society. The Spartans fought so that their women and children would not be enslaved and they not slaughtered by the Persians. The right not to be slaughtered and the right not to be enslaved —what, pray tell, are they, if not the ultimate individual rights? To claim members of a flawed society cannot fight for individual liberties is a non sequitur.”

The excerpt is from my new WorldNetDaily column, “‘300′: Not A Top Pick With Metrosexuals.” (WND’s title.)

I hope this addresses some of the critical comments BAB readers leveled at me in an earlier discussion. My libertarian critics (at least those who are on the right side of the Lincoln debate) might want to consider, in this context, whether they would philosophically disqualify members of the Confederate States as legitimate defenders against indisputable Northern aggression, because some Southerners owned slaves (384,000 whites out of more than 8 million, to be precise).