As a (L)libertarian, I believe there are no caveats to human rights:
Pick the one that does not require the use of force against another human being to accomplish it’s goals:
A) War
B) Murder
C) Rape
D) Slavery
E) Theft
F) TaxationToday, I will use ________ as my justification for the use of government as a proxy to force other people to give their money to be spent on things I believe should be important to other people. If they resist their Property being stolen for my cause, then I approve of their losing their remaining human rights to Liberty and, if that is resisted, then their right to Life will also be forfeit.
A. Social Justice
B. Allah/God/Buddha/etc
C. The wealth and power of myself and friends
D. None of the above: I actually support, and know what human rights are.
BONUS QUESTION:
Pick the one human right violation used by governments to commit the remaing human rights violations against their own citizens:
A. War
B. Murder
C. Rape
D. Slavery
E. Theft
F. Taxation
*If you answered Taxation is Theft, double your score!
I have no problem using force, even deadly force, against another person to accomplish my goal if that goal is survival in a self defense situation.
It's the 'initiation' of force that I have a problem with.
Note: a credible threat is in itself the initiation force, allowing justifiable retaliation.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Agreed. That's why these are all examples of others initiating force.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit