Your sacred cow is in mortal danger Provoking the herd since 2002 

home

 Let's talk about ..
Be Offended - Be Very Offended Shoot the cow! Shoot the cow!  

S-e-x
Religion
Politics





 You Asked for It!
» Fairly random comments   2003-01-31 07:02 Literal Elite

You said: "A negative answer means you are a redneck who thinks the purpose of the war is to kill as many innocent Iraqis as possible."

In that case wouldn't you pick a number bigger than the population of Iraq? Or do you mean a negative correlation between killing innocent Iraqis and the war being unjust. I would take a negative answer to mean the US somehow has to raise the dead, i.e. those who argue that war is unjust because `sanctions have killed millions of Iraquis`.

And now for some comments on the definitions:

You claim here that "you cannot morally own someone else" which seems inconsistant with you definition of morality which states:

  • It is your right to do anything, except initiate force against another person or their property.

From this follows the corollaries:

  • You are responsible for all your own choices.
  • You are not responsible for any of the choices of anyone else.
  • More choice does not make you a victim.

So while I would not choose to live in a country where adults could sell themselves into slavery (that would certainly encourage careful reading of small print) why is it immoral? How much freedom do you have if you cannot give it away?

I think the description is possibly a bit harsh on Africa

"Maintaining a military is a necessary overhead. Any nation which is wealthier than its neighbors will be invaded almost immediately without a military deterrent. Some libertarians believe that governments not take taxes to pay for a military. In a perfect world (where no one had a military), this would be fine, but in the existing international political climate it is just naive. These people should either get a life, or end theirs." - Military . This seems to have forgetten about Switzerland, which has done rather a good job of not being invaded without having an army by simply arming the civilian population and staying neutral unless attacked. While it may not be suitable for say America due to international terrorism it has the advantage of significantly favouring the defender.

Have you been spending some time in the ministry of love learning to count for this difinition.

Anyway, great site, kind of a 21st century Devil's Dictionary.

Literal Elite

--


  • Fairly random comments -- Strawman 2003-01-31