Quote:
Originally Posted by PR_Glen
100% your choice, but if your choice violates the 14th amendment you will not only get fined but be subject to lawsuit... and if you aren't american most civilized countries have the same set of laws in their constitution as well.
I'm all for less government interference, i'm all for less pc nonsense like this example in the op but lets choose our battles a little better shall we? Ripping apart constitutional rights just so you can 'dowhatchawanna' isn't reason enough for that to be changed.
|
Like you, a minarchist, I also placed great emphasis on the constitution, as if it were some sort of divine document.
But then I realized it's just a piece of paper, with scribbligs on it by a bunch of dead guys.
Instead of subscribing to this document, it's best to abide by a simple set of first principles.
1. It's wrong to initiate or threaten the initiation of force against a person or their property.
2. Self-ownership includes property (we own our bodies), and scarce resources are subject to property ownership through original appropriation or voluntary exchange.
All we need is #1, and #2.
This is known as the Non-Aggression Principle (NAP) and #2 is simply property rights.
So if we look at issues through the scope of #1 and #2, we can see that a business owner (their property) should be able to hire whoever they wish, based on whichever preferences they have. And that's because to *not* hire someone, for any reason (brown black green fat redheaded, what have you), is not a violation of #1 (The NAP). To not hire someone is not an initiation of force, or the threat thereof.
You can look at a whole slew of hot topic issues in society through the scope of #1 and #2 and make concrete determinations as to whether they're "right" or "wrong", or fall within the scope of being criminal or not.
Taxation for instance breaks #1 (The NAP), because a group of individuals called the government threaten the initiation of force (and act on it) if you don't relinquish a portion of your property.
Not wearing seatbelts does not break the NAP, therefore there should be no "rights" of law enforcement to steal your money (ticketing).
Prostitution does not break the NAP, therefore it should be legal.
Smoking crack, or doing heroin, or ingesting gasoline; all acts that within themselves, do not break the NAP; therefore they should be legal.
If at any point during any of the above acts, you break the NAP yourself (initiate or threaten the initiation of force against another person or their property), *then* you've crossed the line.
Hopefully this rant will help a few minarchists out and come on over to the side of reason; anarchism.