--- Alypius Skinner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: "But what if this ugly guy isn't rich--oh! You mean pecuniary benefits taken from *other* people--purely through voluntary donations of course. After all, you consider force to be (morally?) "bad." I'm just looking for some consistency here."
That's funny. I'm assuming that I don't really need to justify why I feel there is a difference between taxation & sexual slavery. -jsh > > > > John Hull wrote: > > > > --- Jacob W Braestrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "Would we ever say: "Uhhh, this guy is ugly and no > > good, bad mannered and ill tempered - but, it's no > > fault of his own, and he REALLY doesn't enjoy the > > competition for sexual partner forced upon him by > > society, so why don't we just force this beautiful > > girl to have sex with him"" > > > > Um, no. Force would be bad. You could sweeten > the > > deal for her, however, using perhaps pecuinary > > benefits to level the field. > > But what if this ugly guy isn't rich--oh! You mean > pecuniary benefits taken > from *other* people--purely through voluntary > donations of course. After > all, you consider force to be (morally?) "bad." > I'm just looking for some > consistency here. > > But what happens if there aren't enough people who > are willing to donate? > > ~Alypius Skinner > > __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com
