Vic,

Your seriously anti-libertarian / aggression-advocating comments
beg me to repeat the question: Which pro-libertarian positions do
you endorse and why? (I assume you endorse SOME or you would not
be here.) If you could just name one, I could probably show that
your support for it is based in the non-aggression principle -
and that your support for military aggression is inconsistent.

-Mark

++++++++++++++++++


Terry L Parker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Vic, if you want clear answers you must ask clear questions  :)
> 
> If a person knowingly, and of their own free will, gets drunk
or 
> impairs their own facilities, they are still responsible for
their 
> own actions.  Free moral agency arises from the conscious
volition of 
> a person.  Each person's inalienable right to individual self-
> ownership is always inseperable from their responsiblity to
respect 
> that of other persons.  

doesnt that presume you are at all times in the clearest state of
mind
with a clear undestanding of what is going on?

and further doesnt that only work when both side have the best of
intentions? what happens when one side has bad intentions and
will use
whatever means to get their aim, that seems to be ok provided
that
person uses no violence or threat of violences.

Vic




ForumWebSiteAt  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian  
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Reply via email to