Political Perspective: Why look your way?

[Comrade]

That is a very tricky question.

Is stopping someone from hurting himself infringing on his liberty?

There's a bunch of ways to look at it, I want yall to consider an opinion of mine:
Hurting yourself denies you liberty.
To preserve the liberty of everyone, we have to help others where they might falter a little, or else everyone gets dragged down. So preventing someone from renouncing his own liberty by hurting himself, you could be helping both him and yourself, possibly others, in retaining their own freedom of actions without resorting to government intervention.
I am not going to support your right to suicide or harmful drugs any more than I am going to support your liberty to choose to commit treason or arson.

[libertyminded]

I can't believe anyone is attempting to make an argument against people's liberty to do to themselves as they wish.

All arguments I've seen here so far are authoritarian/despotic in nature.

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by

Comrade

There's a bunch of ways to look at it, I want yall to consider an opinion of mine:
Hurting yourself denies you liberty.
To preserve the liberty of everyone, we have to help others where they might falter a little, or else everyone gets dragged down. So preventing someone from renouncing his own liberty by hurting himself, you could be helping both him and yourself, possibly others, in retaining their own freedom of actions without resorting to government intervention.
<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
Kyran

You can call it force, and you can have a problem with it. But what you've got to realize is moderate America has no trouble with the government prohibiting self-destruction. They won't call the police if someone jerks up a crack addict and puts them in rehab.

If people aren't free to step into the lives of others this way, they are gonna get the government to do it. Have we earned our right to have any of those things if we abuse them? Those who would trade liberty for security deserve neither.
<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

You no more have the right to stop someone from using drugs or commiting suicide then you do to stop them from engaging in homosexual acts or mountain climbing without proper saftey equipment.

Who get's to decide which risky behaviors the government regulates? It's all just a question of relevant social morals which are inherently subjective. You can discourage all of these behaviors or even force you're imediate friends and family to stop them, but you should NOT be able to get the government involved in stopping anything other then direct and clear infringements by one person on anothers person or property.

[Kyran]

liberty, my argument is not authoritarian in nature. If it were, I would be pro-government prohibition. I'm not! I completely oppose the idea that government should imprison people for abusing themselves. A lot of people in this country think the drug war is a positive effort to stop others from being self-destructive. However I disagree and have an alternative unique to any other philosophy.

Let me clarify something. When I say drug abuse, I mean addiction not moderation. Nobody should toss anyone in rehab for drinking once a year. It's the alcoholics who have thrown their lives away to the bottle who need help. The goal is reducing addiction.

You have no right to arrest me for pinning someone down who attempts to jump off a skyscraper. Think you do? Guess again buddy. Does libertarianism want a heroism prohibition? Is prison where people belong who volunteer time & effort in the salvation of another's life, liberty, or property?

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Your ideals work most of the time, but you fail to see this loophole. America is not going to go gestapo on people who help others. Forget it.

By all means, prove me wrong. If Force is inherently evil then describe a method by which a crack addict is going to get off of crack. Are addicts free?

Libertarianism and Conservatism are nothing more than branches of Fusionism. Each take one rule to the extreme. We can either have a War on Drugs or a War on Heroes. Which brother shall we imprison for no just cause?

[libertyminded]

Kyran

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
Kyran
By all means, prove me wrong. If Force is inherently evil then describe a method by which a crack addict is going to get off of crack. Are addicts free?<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

Actualy, read

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
libertyminded
You can discourage all of these behaviors or even force your imediate friends and family to stop them, but you should NOT be able to get the government involved<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

Just like people do now with alcohol.

There are 2 ways in which things would be different if Libertarian government were in place that would also dramatically reduce drug use.

1. Schools would be decentralized massively (go take a look at the "Forced Schooling in America" thread). There was a time when America was the most educated and intellectual country in the world, we had 98% literacy rate for non-slaves and community schools consisted of small buildings all over the place where kids from 7-14 would all gather for some formal schooling but for the most part everyone taught themselves whatever they wanted and most learned to read complex liturature played an instrument, spoke 2 languages and was physically fit. Go back to this format of schooling and education where all parents are expected to be teaching their own children for the most part and using schools as one of many tools for educating their children. This fosters a much greater sense of community. In the current system, the extremely smart kids are looked down upon by the rest of the students and those smart kids learn to hate the dumb ones. It is this stack'em high, stack'em deep schooling that has turned schools into nothing more government sponsord massive social clubs, with a slight primmer and gloss over of specifically tailored information. Which is in the end a diguise for yet another jobs train for the government where two thirds of every dollar taxed for education never makes it's way into a classroom and is absorbed by the huge bureaucracy of administrators experts side contracts and outright waste. This might sound a little conspiracy theory to you but when you decentralize government control of the "education system" and get rid of that gravy train being fed by the "how much more the schools need to do a better job" rhetoric, people will actually be a lot smarter, will know the people in their communities personally. and be more likely to share eachothers moral values.

2. Once we had spent another couple of generations reaclimating ourselves to self governance and personal responsibility, we would see a dramatic reduction in drug abuse; although I don't think drug use will disapear nor does it need to.

Most higher (no pun intended) mammal species have a certain percentage of animals that will use narcotics for recreational purposes and a smaller percentage will overuse and develop additctions (actually about the same percentage of chimps and baboons become addicted as humans).

When you legislate morals through the government you will inevitably have ideolouges hijacking the system.

[Kyran]

Okay, liberty, I just wanted to make sure you meant it like that. Good man. I'm glad we're in agreement on these topics; certain others in your party are not.

You have a message in your inbox regarding that education matter.

[terstorm]

</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (dotComa,)
I could be called liberal. I am in this broad classification because I support: universal healthcare, a higher safety net for the poor, and many other liberal issues (affirmative action, gay rights, etc).

I want the world to truly be a place of opportunity, and I believe that things like excessive health-care costs, and the quality of our schools, have an effect on how much opportunity is available to everyone. I think that the whole <"programs=taxes, and taxes=less revenue for ME"> doesn't consider that if healthcare was cheaper, and education was better, we would have more consumers, and more business opportunities.
Just my quick opinion on this matter.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>

I suppose I have the same beliefs so I could be called liberal, except I support gun rights too.

[lucas]

I am an Objectivist. The situation is a bit exaggerated, but I still believe that Altas Shrugged shows how my philosophy affects the world. We can also see the poor effects of communism, facism, and totalitarianism throughout the past. So I am a liberal capitalist.

[The_Isolationist]

My political philosophy can save society. My philosophy isn't conservative or liberal -- it's Messianic. And as an Ambassador of the Messianic Kingdom I have a political message from my King -- don't put your faith in a political philosophy to save society, the societies of mankind are giving way to the everlasting Monarchy of King Yeshua. Only His political system will save society from the ravegings of mankind's political philosophies.

It's up to you to choose whether to follow the folly of man, making you an enemy of the Kingdom and putting yourself on our political enemies list (slated to be destroyed) or submit yourself to the Kingdom and Its all powerful and majestic King Yeshua HaMashiach. Because once the King returns all the enemies of the Kingdom, who haven't already been destroyed, will certainly be destroyed on that Day! Whether liberal, conservative, libertarian or communist -- if you are not a member of the Kingdom Party you have signed your own death certificate. Then we, under our King Yeshua, will take totally control of Earth, setting up a political system through which peace, righteous politics, and justice will rule supreme for the first time since the fall of humanity.