Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Election 2012
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="henschman" data-source="post: 1827806" data-attributes="member: 4235"><p>Good, I'm glad we agree on something, patriot! I thought that little snippet, if it represented your actual views, was a bit contradictory of some of the other views you expressed, and I always like to try to get people to consider the inconsistencies in their beliefs. That particular sentiment is unfortunately a commonly-held belief among those calling themselves conservatives... "Oh, I only support redistribution of wealth for those who REALLY need it -- but not those lazy loafers who are just abusing the system." </p><p></p><p>If you concede the point that ANY form of forceful appropriation of property is acceptable, you concede the moral point to the statists, and then it is just an argument over how much and who gets to decide. That type of argument is lose/lose for anyone who seriously believes in individual rights. </p><p></p><p>Being a collectivist is kind of like being a whore... a man asked a lady, "would you sleep with me for $15 million dollars?" She said "yes, I guess so." He said "OK, how about $10?" She said, "what kind of woman do you think I am?" He said, "We already established what you are, now we're just dickering over price." Never give up the moral point. </p><p></p><p>I have no problem with voluntarily helping others, as long as you rationally value those whom you are helping more than that which you are giving away. For instance, I would be willing to give a lot to my loved ones, since they provide great meaning and value to my life... whereas to a random stranger I would only be willing to give an amount that is of very little consequence to me, merely out of recognition of our shared humanity and his potential for rationality and possible future cooperation to mutual benefit. I am also willing to give to causes that promote things I value in the world, or which might make my life more enjoyable. But the key is that I give according to MY chosen values, which are determined by the judgment of MY own mind through MY own capacity for reason. I never surrender the judgment of my own mind to that of others, and I don't consider the needs of others to be a claim on my abilities. </p><p></p><p>patriot, I will PM you about Appleseed... it is a little off topic, and I try to avoid mixing my personal politics with my duties as part of that organization, as it is a strictly non-partisan outfit!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="henschman, post: 1827806, member: 4235"] Good, I'm glad we agree on something, patriot! I thought that little snippet, if it represented your actual views, was a bit contradictory of some of the other views you expressed, and I always like to try to get people to consider the inconsistencies in their beliefs. That particular sentiment is unfortunately a commonly-held belief among those calling themselves conservatives... "Oh, I only support redistribution of wealth for those who REALLY need it -- but not those lazy loafers who are just abusing the system." If you concede the point that ANY form of forceful appropriation of property is acceptable, you concede the moral point to the statists, and then it is just an argument over how much and who gets to decide. That type of argument is lose/lose for anyone who seriously believes in individual rights. Being a collectivist is kind of like being a whore... a man asked a lady, "would you sleep with me for $15 million dollars?" She said "yes, I guess so." He said "OK, how about $10?" She said, "what kind of woman do you think I am?" He said, "We already established what you are, now we're just dickering over price." Never give up the moral point. I have no problem with voluntarily helping others, as long as you rationally value those whom you are helping more than that which you are giving away. For instance, I would be willing to give a lot to my loved ones, since they provide great meaning and value to my life... whereas to a random stranger I would only be willing to give an amount that is of very little consequence to me, merely out of recognition of our shared humanity and his potential for rationality and possible future cooperation to mutual benefit. I am also willing to give to causes that promote things I value in the world, or which might make my life more enjoyable. But the key is that I give according to MY chosen values, which are determined by the judgment of MY own mind through MY own capacity for reason. I never surrender the judgment of my own mind to that of others, and I don't consider the needs of others to be a claim on my abilities. patriot, I will PM you about Appleseed... it is a little off topic, and I try to avoid mixing my personal politics with my duties as part of that organization, as it is a strictly non-partisan outfit! [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
Election 2012
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom