Thursday, January 27, 2005
I probably should have done this a while ago, since they're starting to get bumped off, but I'll be including this little war of capitalism vs. socialism in posts until you commies cave. Perhaps it would be worthwhile establishing a base from which both sides can come at the issue of what constitutes rights. If Nick's going to hold that he does have an inalienable right to roads or bubblegum than we must first address this misbelief.
<Keep in mind that posts start at the bottom>
Alden: I think it may be worth pointing out that the fact that someone views something one way, or differently says nothing about the validity of those views (especially if those views are french).
Ben: My d12 has determined that Alden is the victor of this argument, being the only one to have survived the Melf's Proselytizing Spray cast earlier.
Julia: Well I know in France (yes I mentioned France) they culturally view healthcare - the right to live - as an absolutely necessary right.
Julia: This is a bit of an ethnocentric conversation. We view our rights as people as what our government has provided us.
Chad: so they're not iniating force; they're retaliating with it.
Chad: and the reason laws use force is because, in a proper system of laws, they will only be using force against you after you've already violated someone else's rights, ie, broken the law
Chad: "pursuit of happiness", so yes, you have the right to pursue both gumballs and hospitals; it doesn't say "acquisition of happiness" or "have happiness provided to you on the backs of others"
Nick: And if the only right I have is to not have force initiated against me, why are laws coercive, i.e. based on smashing my head in if I break them?
Nick: "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"...gumballs make me happy, and hospitals keep me from dying.
Chad: Remember that the only rights you have are the right NOT to have force initiated against you; you do NOT have the right to transportation, or health, or gumballs. Those you have to earn yourself
Chad: Disaster prevention perhaps does fall under rights protection; the issue to determine is whether they protect you from the use of force, like the 3 proper roles do, and that's a matter for debate
Chad: The absence of hospitals does not violate your rights, thus the government should not produce them.
Chad: The absence of roads does not violate your rights, thus the government should not produce them.
Chad: Military protects you from foreign invaders; police/courts protect you from criminals, and the courts resolve legitimate disputes.
Nick: Inquiring minds wish to know...why are police, military and courts proper roles of government but healthcare, roads, and firefighting are not?
Ben: And that brain-iq article you linked to has a link to "Brain-Sex," which sounds totally hot.
Ben: I like individual... cats.
Alden: I like individual rights.
Chad: The one you're missing is the courts; these three things protect individual rights, while all other public endeavors infringe upon them.
Chad: Ah, but you've named 2 of the 3 proper roles of government, for which moderate taxes are justified: police and military.
Nick: YOU'RE RIGHT! No more taxes. That means no more military, no more police, no more firemen, shitty hospitals, and destroyed roads. It's all stealing and oppression right?
Chad: besides, stealing and oppression is ok as long as its for a flawed but ostensibly good cause, right?
<start here ^>
"While we may bemoan that some cannot keep up, we must never slow the advancement of anyone." - Roe J. Maier
"Ten thousand dollars money. I know I shouldn't have stolen it, but I did, and now it's mine." - Mom, The Brak Show (09, 1, 08) - Father Knows Brak; Psychoklahoma
<Keep in mind that posts start at the bottom>
Alden: I think it may be worth pointing out that the fact that someone views something one way, or differently says nothing about the validity of those views (especially if those views are french).
Ben: My d12 has determined that Alden is the victor of this argument, being the only one to have survived the Melf's Proselytizing Spray cast earlier.
Julia: Well I know in France (yes I mentioned France) they culturally view healthcare - the right to live - as an absolutely necessary right.
Julia: This is a bit of an ethnocentric conversation. We view our rights as people as what our government has provided us.
Chad: so they're not iniating force; they're retaliating with it.
Chad: and the reason laws use force is because, in a proper system of laws, they will only be using force against you after you've already violated someone else's rights, ie, broken the law
Chad: "pursuit of happiness", so yes, you have the right to pursue both gumballs and hospitals; it doesn't say "acquisition of happiness" or "have happiness provided to you on the backs of others"
Nick: And if the only right I have is to not have force initiated against me, why are laws coercive, i.e. based on smashing my head in if I break them?
Nick: "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"...gumballs make me happy, and hospitals keep me from dying.
Chad: Remember that the only rights you have are the right NOT to have force initiated against you; you do NOT have the right to transportation, or health, or gumballs. Those you have to earn yourself
Chad: Disaster prevention perhaps does fall under rights protection; the issue to determine is whether they protect you from the use of force, like the 3 proper roles do, and that's a matter for debate
Chad: The absence of hospitals does not violate your rights, thus the government should not produce them.
Chad: The absence of roads does not violate your rights, thus the government should not produce them.
Chad: Military protects you from foreign invaders; police/courts protect you from criminals, and the courts resolve legitimate disputes.
Nick: Inquiring minds wish to know...why are police, military and courts proper roles of government but healthcare, roads, and firefighting are not?
Ben: And that brain-iq article you linked to has a link to "Brain-Sex," which sounds totally hot.
Ben: I like individual... cats.
Alden: I like individual rights.
Chad: The one you're missing is the courts; these three things protect individual rights, while all other public endeavors infringe upon them.
Chad: Ah, but you've named 2 of the 3 proper roles of government, for which moderate taxes are justified: police and military.
Nick: YOU'RE RIGHT! No more taxes. That means no more military, no more police, no more firemen, shitty hospitals, and destroyed roads. It's all stealing and oppression right?
Chad: besides, stealing and oppression is ok as long as its for a flawed but ostensibly good cause, right?
<start here ^>
"While we may bemoan that some cannot keep up, we must never slow the advancement of anyone." - Roe J. Maier
"Ten thousand dollars money. I know I shouldn't have stolen it, but I did, and now it's mine." - Mom, The Brak Show (09, 1, 08) - Father Knows Brak; Psychoklahoma
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]