Some numbers

[DEAD7]

SS is fine I just wish it would focus on the things people cant do for themselves, not the things they choose not to do...


Thats not that crazy is it?

 

[The Real]

This is in every way government holding peoples hand.
It should be a private decision, with private consequences and/or benefits.

that said, it is by far the least offensive of govt. policies.

Spoiler

it is crazy

But what is your response to my point? Even the "hand-holding" analogy isn't particular offensive in many situations.

 

[DEAD7]

But what is your response to my point? Even the "hand-holding" analogy isn't particular offensive in many situations.

The initiation of force is wrong whether it violates your freedom or not. IMHO.

If you have a good idea, let it live or die on its on merit. Dont mandate it.

 

[Futuristic Eskimo]

Let's get rid of traffic lights then. Forcing people to stop is wrong. A person's inclination to continue driving into oncoming traffic should live or die on its own merit

Your worldview is completely impractical and not applicable to a functioning society. When are you going to realize this?

 

[DEAD7]

Let's get rid of traffic lights then. Forcing people to stop is wrong. A person's inclination to continue driving into oncoming traffic should live or die on its own merit

Your worldview is completely impractical and not applicable to a functioning society. When are you going to realize this?

You're probably right, morality has been in the bushes for some time

 

[Futuristic Eskimo]

You're probably right, morality has been in the bushes for some time

In what way is that situation not the government initiating force on the public? Don't give me that bullshyt when its convenient for your argument but dismiss in it other common, everyday situations.

You act like your philosophy has a monopoly on morality when that is simply not true. Unfortunately for you, the marketplace of ideas has reduced yours to a laughingstock

 

[DEAD7]

In what way is that situation not the government initiating force on the public? Don't give me that bullshyt when its convenient for your argument but dismiss in it other common, everyday situations.

You act like your philosophy has a monopoly on morality when that is simply not true. Unfortunately for you, the marketplace of ideas has reduced yours to a laughingstock

No I dont. If you think the initiation of force is moral you are free to think so. I'd love to hear your argument though.

 

[Futuristic Eskimo]

No I dont. If you think the initiation of force is moral you are free to think so. I'd love to hear your argument though.

You dodge and deflect like a pro

Good day sir

 

[superunknown23]

You dodge and deflect like a pro

Good day sir

OP thread turned out exactly as I predicted.
So typically pointless

 

[DEAD7]

You dodge and deflect like a pro

Good day sir

I didnt think you were serious about the stop lights . The cops arresting you at gunpoint for running the light is the force, the lights dont do anything.


Now how is the initiation of force moral?

 

[Futuristic Eskimo]

I didnt think you were serious about the stop lights . The cops arresting you at gunpoint for running the light is the force, the lights dont do anything.

Now how is the initiation of force moral?

So the government mandating that you stop at red lights isn't an initiation of force They're there to regulate traffic. We all know how you dont like regulation thoThe example is so ridiculous that Im laughing as well, but this is where your principles lead if you follow them to their logical conclusions. I'm not interesting in rehashing this debate. I'm pretty sure I, and countless other posters here, have explained why we believe force is necessary in certain situations.I was mainly here to throw shots at you and leave

 

[DEAD7]

So the government mandating that you stop at red lights isn't an initiation of force They're there to regulate traffic. We all know how you dont like regulation thoThe example is so ridiculous that Im laughing as well, but this is where your principles lead if you follow them to their logical conclusions. I'm not interesting in rehashing this debate. I'm pretty sure I, and countless other posters here, have explained why we believe force is necessary in certain situations.I was mainly here to throw shots at you and leave

People would voluntarily choose to stop at red lights This example is silly.

 

[OneManGang]

Let's get rid of traffic lights then. Forcing people to stop is wrong. A person's inclination to continue driving into oncoming traffic should live or die on its own merit

Your worldview is completely impractical and not applicable to a functioning society. When are you going to realize this?

 

[Futuristic Eskimo]

People would voluntarily choose to stop at red lights This example is silly.

No, you just happen to be an idiot No mandate would increase the likelihood of people running red lights and would therefore increase vehicular fatalities. In this simple (for some) example, government initiating force has a positive net benefit towards society. So, for you to run around screaming about how any initiation of force is morally wrong, you have to concede that even basic governance such as traffic laws are against everything you stand for. Obviously this is an untenable position for you, so mental gymnastics ensue

 

[Brown_Pride]

SS is fine I just wish it would focus on the things people cant do for themselves, not the things they choose not to do...

Thats not that crazy is it?

It can be. Even per your own views a person should be paid A WAGE correct? Forget how much but we can agree A WAGE is crucial no? Well there was a point in time when people CHOSE not to pay people for their work. I hate to go to slavery but it's a good example of what happens when governments don't change things the people want. It behooves the government to look out for the general welfare of its people, even in spite of its people's unwillingness to do so for themselves.