A very good transcript of a debate between an advocate of gathering a diverse moral base to support libertarian freedom (finding and supporting common ground regardless of fact) and an objectivist argument to fully understand and maintain the primacy of The Moral Base of Liberty.

Is obtaining the diversity of morals, regardless of the reasoning for such, a better approach in hopefully gaining a freer world for all of society more important than the Objectivist moral argument for obtaining free individuals? Is the libertarian compromise of moral reasons and beliefs a real solution or is too much of a mishmash of incrementalism?