Guilt by Association

Today's New York Times features a rather staggering profile of "economist" Gary North. Mr. North is a proponent of what's known as "biblical economics". Through some sort of magical transfusion, he is described as a libertarian.

And as noted atheist and godmother of libertarianism, Ayn Rand spins in her grave howling, let's take a moment to look this piece over (I suspect her ghost hasn't been this displeased since reviews of "Atlas Shrugged" started coming in).

Granted, his economic positions are broadly libertarian in that they argue that services and responsibilities fulfilled by the state should instead be devolved to the individual. Most libertarian intellectuals would probably reach the same conclusions having read Mises, Hayek, Friedman et al. while he came to them after perusing the mystical writings of a nomadic, desert tribe but that's neither here nor there. The conclusions are basically the same though Mr. North arrived at his via...different means.

But then...

These “Reconstructionists” are believers in Christian Reconstructionism, the philosophy of R. J. Rushdoony, who died in 2001. According to Reconstructionism, a Christian theocracy under Old Testament law is the best form of government, and a radically libertarian one. Biblical law, they believe, presupposes total government decentralization, with the family and church providing order. Until that day comes, Reconstructionists believe the rights to home-school and to worship freely at least provide the barest conditions of liberty. 

Emphasis mine.

Let's be clear: One can share libertarian ideals and not be a libertarian. Everyone has a different 'acid test' for what that might be. I would say however, that advocating for an OLD TESTAMENT THEOCRACY would be a bit beyond the pale for anyone devoted to the principles of economic and civil liberty! The Old Testament hardly has a live-and-let-live worldview.