Of course! I was talking about conservative v. liberal in that section - and it shows how broken the spectrum is.

Eh. Parents can complain all they wish about evolution, sex-ed, history or anything else - it's always something in a public school system, which I maintain is a left-right issue more than a libertarian-authoritarian issue, as public school is not mandatory.

Sex ed is a public health concern, on par with teaching kids to wash their hands. The argument that parents will teach it rings hollow when social conservatives in fact more often do not, leading to a higher rate of teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted (as opposed to needle transmitted) diseases amongst the children of socially conservative parents.

Also, while this pulls us off topic, they don't "teach homosexuality." They teach that it's ok to be gay and that it's wrong to bully gay kids. A minority of conservatives disagree, but wish to pretend not to be dangerous bigots, so this minority pretends the schools teach homosexuality.

They do teach the perils of anal and oral intercourse, and the importance of using protection and screening, which is necessary to stop the spread of dangerous diseases, which socially conservative parents will not teach at home (other than, for a minority, to say that being gay is wrong, and never talk to anyone about being gay).

Rioting? That's a little dramatic. There's no more "rioting" over sex-ed than any other contentious issue, be it beer sales, school prayer, the HST or the constant screwing with the history curriculum.

Finally, more or less government policy may be or may not be libertarian or authoritarian, but that scale does not mirror "good" and "bad". Firing all police would technically be more libertarian by this metric - not a good thing. Some socially authoritarian policies, like the criminal code and ending restrictive covenants, are good things. I'd argue so are charter rights. Libertarianism is an ideological direction, not divine revelation of the perfect world.