From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Sat Jul 16 2005 - 12:22:51 BST
> msh 7-15-05:
> You've offered the above Pirsig quote as the "moral underpinning"
> of your belief that government should not regulate the behavior of
> its citizens, even if it's been shown that certain behavior is
> potentially destructive of society. Starting with the quote you've
> offered, please provide a line of argument and evidence that leads
> to your conclusion.
No where at no time have I said what you say I said.
> msh 7-15-05:
> In your hypothetical situation, no one is forced to give blood.
> Healthy people who don't want to give blood during a shortage may
> contribute through paying an increased tax. Another option is to
> give tax rebates to blood-donors. Anyway, I fail to see how my quick
> response to a hypothetical question has made your point that I'll "justify
> any government intrusion into private lives to 'save lives' including
> blood-letting."
Taxes are a government intrusion into private lives backed by force. If
you don't believe it, don't pay them and see what happens. Then write to
tell us.
> Or, better still, let's get back to the core of this thread. I
> posted the following, but got no response from you:
OK. Since forcing people to give blood, donate their organs and otherwise
give up their private parts doesn't phase your sense of human dignity,
I'll try a different tack.
> msh 7-12-05:
> Your slippery slope has proved to be non-existent. We already
> collect taxes for police, fire and EMT services, and thus are
> "forcing others by law" to save lives. Why should a tax-based system for
> providing life-saving medical services be regarded differently?
>
> In fact, since most police work is about protecting property, it
> could be argued that a tax-based health system that will positively
> affect millions of lives is an even higher moral priority than most
> police services.
>
> What is your MOQ-based moral justification for tax-based police and
> fire services?
In most communities, those have been voted for.
And why does it not apply to life-saving medical
services?
Except for EMT and emergency room services, in most communities those
haven't been voted for.
Now if you want to impose Hillary care on U.S. citizens so they have to
wait for weeks to get basic medical care, why don't you just come out an
say so?
Next you'll being saying the MOQ justifies a minimum guaranteed income for
everybody. Geez.
Platt
Platt
OK, back to square one. Forget about "saving lives" being the
justification for every dictatorship that ever existed
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jul 16 2005 - 12:58:55 BST