No, it's because you're acting like a fundamentalist. Real-world society-level choices involve balancing competing concerns from many groups of people. When somebody optimizes for exactly one thing (e.g., the you're-not-my-dad kind of freedom) and refuses to acknowledge anybody else's concerns as legitimate, all the while spouting dogma that relates to their views, I call that fundamentalist. I'm all for minimum state intervention and wide devolution of power, but unless you balance that with other concerns it, like anything, leads to pathological results.