Good question Peter Hume.
That will be interesting how well that can be answered.

"what area of life do you think government is *not* justified in controlling?"

A government is not there to control - it is to serve, so the answer is EVERYTHING.

The mandate of a government is to serve people, so a pre-condition for any government activity is that there are actual people involved who request the service. People who are not involved, don't count!

Services may include for example health; education; creating and backing-up an economy; external defence; and the most contentious one: internal defence.

Typically, the area of economy is where governments can make most rules and regulations, because (assuming) this serves the wishes of many people to create a complex mechanism to enhance trading. So long as there is a way for individuals to not take part in, or even to opt out of that economy, it is OK for laws about how-to-and-how-not-to-use the economy to be quite elaborate and limiting.

Now for the hard part, internal defence, where state needs to interfere with some people in order to protect others:
It is never right to defend a person against herself or a group-in-agreement against each other unless they ask for it (this obviously excludes the case where non-consenting other(s) are also hurt by the same acts).

However, certain common-sense assumptions need to be made, by default so long as there is no indication to the contrary, for example:

1. People generally want to be protected against violence by strangers.
2. Even people who do not seek protection against certain forms(s) of violence by particular other(s), are likely to seek protection had they knew that the grounds on which they accept the violence against them is fraudulent.
3. Minors don't yet have an understanding about what is violence and what it means to be protected, but if they had this understanding they would be likely to ask for protection.

So this is a brief summary of what governments MAY do. What functions out of it they actually perform, when and where, should be subject to the wishes of the people who established the government, typically by majority voting.

Correct. But there are a lot of people who think a particular thing that happened to them, Who can't see why we have laws, dosen't relate to them.

Peter Hume,"What area of life is Govt not justified in controlling?"
An excellent question.As Govt takes over resopsibility of individual actions,so do individuals become more irresponsible.If there are no serious consequences for poor behaviour,individuals will not learn from their mistakes.There is an elitist attitude that only the educated know the true path of civilisation.They remove from the individual by way of Govt handouts,the trial of evolution and the ability to be truely autonomous.If there is no discipline in the schools,how can children learn about sacrificing present pleasures, for future gain?

Both we and the USA are on the verge of being a totalitarian state.Kevin Rudd is pushing through an ETS [Emissions Trading Scam]with no consultation with the electorate.This is not democracy!Why the urgency,when what we do now,will not affect so called AGW one iota? What about the Hadley Centre debacle that our corporate media cowardly refrain from mentioning?It is a lie and a scam!

Again,I urge you all to see "Fall of the Republic" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VebOTc-7shU

If you want copies of this CD, contact Nick Sykes, nskyes@exemail.com.au

It puts together the whole economic,political,economic ,climate,war dilemmas we now all face.It is a must see,if you want your children to have a future based on liberty and true democracy.

Interesting post about the lack of autonomy in ordinary life.
It begins early in "school". The machine takes over and every life is swept along.
Almost from the time infants first embrace themselves as a separate individual, they are harnessed into the system. They are told what to learn and how to learn it..
Under our system of education, children quickly lose the ability to think for themselves, so accustomed are they to being directed in their tasks. Compare this to the first few years of life that if left unfettered are filled with self-directed learning.
No wonder we have a country filled with adults who, although they yearn for liberty, wait patiently to be directed by the powers that be.

As a libertarian,

An individual should be free to excercise his will and preferences and live his life as he deems fit. The only restriction is that what he/she does, does not negatively impact on others.

The purpose of government is to promote this for all its citizens by providing the infrastructure and regulatory background to maximise this.

For example council planning is to ensure that the building is safe, and does not negatively impact on the neighbourhood.

Where the government oversteps its bounds is when it regulates based on a particular group "being offended", if this does not negatively affect their ability to live their life, then the gov has no need to legislate.