Jump to content

New Orleans To Remove Excremental Rebel Monuments


Tiberius

Recommended Posts

What's your argument again?

 

 

 

I believe slavery is morally wrong, as I believe in natural rights and self ownership.

That's the entirety of my reasoning.

 

However, I also believe, that because of self ownership, it is perfectly moral for someone to sell themselves into slavery.

 

Now, what's the rest of yours?

Edited by TakeYouToTasker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What??? :doh: That's wacky. Can you give us an example of where this has happened?

 

And that's all to my argument

 

Indentured servitude was/is a step in that direction as was the practice of buying "substitutes" for what was at the time seen as onerous tasks, e.g., military service

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's simplistic by necessity. it's not even possible to get consensus on the morality of slavery here. people want to game that simple question. how would broadening the scope be useful?

That's not true at all. The only one being ambiguous about their stance on slavery is YOU by refusing to comment on your own support of modern slavery while claiming others here are somehow pro slavery. And by not addressing your own conflict on this issue you prove yourself to be intellectually dishonest.

 

It's hilarious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, if you believe in natural rights and self ownership, then it's the only logically consistent stance.

Asking gatorman to make a logically consistent stance, or to even understand logic, is like asking the band Europe to ignore a final countdown.

 

it's what they can't do

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No

Wrong.

 

Natural rights stem from self ownership. If you own yourself, you have the moral right to obligate yourself by entering into contract.

 

If you don't believe this to be true, then you don't believe in self ownership, and therefore cannot believe in natural rights.

 

If that's actually the case, then you'll have to make a different case for your opposition to slavery.

Edited by TakeYouToTasker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrong.

 

Natural rights stem from self ownership. If you own yourself, you have the moral right to obligate yourself by entering into contract.

 

If you don't believe this to be true, then you don't believe in self ownership, and therefore cannot believe in natural rights.

 

If that's actually the case, then you'll have to make a different case for your opposition to slavery.

Ok, so if, say, I get a 20 year women to sign her life over to me, can I legally beat her, rape her, chain her up? Is that all legal in your world?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What??? :doh: That's wacky. Can you give us an example of where this has happened?

 

 

 

Drug addiction? :huh:

Ok, so if, say, I get a 20 year women to sign her life over to me, can I legally beat her, rape her, chain her up? Is that all legal in your world?

 

Huh??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, so if, say, I get a 20 year women to sign her life over to me, can I legally beat her, rape her, chain her up? Is that all legal in your world?

It may be distasteful, however if she voluntarily consented to the terms of the contract without being compelled by force or threat of violence, then it absolutely should be legal, and would not be morally wrong in the framework of natural rights. If a person can be said to own themselves, then they reserve the right to do with themselves as they see fit.

Huh??

He's making an appeal to emotion fallacy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It may be distasteful, however if she voluntarily consented to the terms of the contract without being compelled by force or threat of violence, then it absolutely should be legal, and would not be morally wrong in the framework of natural rights. If a person can be said to own themselves, then they reserve the right to do with themselves as they see fit.

He's making an appeal to emotion fallacy.

Chef? What's your take on this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

He's making an appeal to emotion fallacy.

 

Yes. Slavery does not have to come along with beatings, rape or bondage.

Chef? What's your take on this?

 

Simple answer. Some of the libertarian ideas I disagree with 100%

 

Oh and Mods, mark this down. 12/22/2105 at 8:21am PST gator and Chef agreed on something.

Edited by Chef Jim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yes. Slavery does not have to come along with beatings, rape or bondage.

Individuals can already agree, quite legally, to enter into contracts that allow them to be beaten and bound. Rape has no place in the discussion, because rape implies a lack of consent. Entering into a contract grants consent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So you're saying all slaves were beaten, raped and held in bondage?

You just said that

Individuals can already agree, quite legally, to enter into contracts that allow them to be beaten and bound. Rape has no place in the discussion, because rape implies a lack of consent. Entering into a contract grants consent.

But once she signed the document freely giving her rights away, she could never legally say no. Ergo, even if she fought against a guy trying to poke her, it would not be rape

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you buy a house, you can't legally burn it down.

That has to do with insurance fraud, and the high probability of damaging property that isn't your own, due to the nature of fire and proximity in most residential neighborhoods.

 

You are certainly free to destroy your own house, however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So?

 

I agree that if someone agrees to be owned by someone else and work for that person for no pay I have no problem with that. It's their life they can do what they choose. You're mention of beatings, rape and bondage have nothing to do with my scenario.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But once she signed the document freely giving her rights away, she could never legally say no. Ergo, even if she fought against a guy trying to poke her, it would not be rape

That would depend on the nature of the contract. Would the contract specify that she retained her sexual rights? What is the duration of the contract?

 

The bottom line is, that by signing such a contract she would have given her consent. If she consents, why is there a problem?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I agree that if someone agrees to be owned by someone else and work for that person for no pay I have no problem with that. It's their life they can do what they choose. You're mention of beatings, rape and bondage have nothing to do with my scenario.

What? If I bought---God forbid!--Ocin--and he refused to work, would you think it legal for me to beat him with a ball bat?

That would depend on the nature of the contract. Would the contract specify that she retained her sexual rights? What is the duration of the contract?

 

The bottom line is, that by signing such a contract she would have given her consent. If she consents, why is there a problem?

This is stupid, what if she changed her mind after 24 hrs and ran away. Can I call the police and have her arrested for theft of property, herself?

Edited by gatorman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is stupid, what if she changed her mind after 24 hrs and ran away. Can I call the police and have her arrested for theft of property, herself?

She should, in fact, be returned as a fugitive if apprehended.

 

She consented. She voluntarily entered into contract.

 

Why do you oppose the application of a person's natural rights in this instance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What? If I bought---God forbid!--Ocin--and he refused to work, would you think it legal for me to beat him with a ball bat?

 

 

Of course not. Where have you gotten the idea that I feel that it would be legal? If he refuses to work for you for free and you own him and he refuses to work and wants to leave you take it to the legal department. Now having said that if you took it upon yourself to beat OC it would tend to look the other way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh brother

I've asked you a very serious question. Why do you reject protecting an individuals natural rights in the instance I've provided?

 

I assume you support an individual's natural right to die: to terminate their own life, or to ask the assistance of another individual to help them end their life?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Of course not. Where have you gotten the idea that I feel that it would be legal? If he refuses to work for you for free and you own him and he refuses to work and wants to leave you take it to the legal department. Now having said that if you took it upon yourself to beat OC it would tend to look the other way.

Poor OC! :lol:

I've asked you a very serious question. Why do you reject protecting an individuals natural rights in the instance I've provided?

 

I assume you support an individual's natural right to die: to terminate their own life, or to ask the assistance of another individual to help them end their life?

Yes, I would

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very different. Being old, sick and in pain and wanting to be put out of your misery is very different from freely turing your life over to a slave owner, which I doubt anyone would even want to do anymore

 

No they are not very different. It's call choice. That is one of the libertarian concepts I do partially agree with. A person's right to choose their own life and how they live it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No they are not very different. It's call choice. That is one of the libertarian concepts I do partially agree with. A person's right to choose their own life and how they live it.

Your natural rights are yours, they can't just be signed away to another person. The only way anyone would want to do this if there was massive poverty and no welfare state. So the poor, the elderly and women would be tempted to do it because there was no where else to turn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...