Everything you say would be correct in a place where there was such a Threat of Initiation of Force. Fraud IS indeed an acceptable response to Initiation of Force OR Fraud.
However, I do not believe that Egypt is such a place. but that is top be seen. For now, can we agree that, in the absence of such Threats, a slut who defrauds a prospective Fuckor is violating ZAP/ZAP? And yes, that applies equally to men and to women; if a woman does not want to fuck a man who is a Negro, or who is not a Virgin, or who does not have a million bucks, then it would be RAPE to tell her otherwise in order to get into her panties. Same for a Woman who tells a man a lie in order to fuck him or marry him. And in fact this happened in a reality show on TV a couple of years ago, some women wanted to fuck a millionaire Bachelor, but they didn't want to fuck just anybody, and this guy LIED ans said he was a Millionaire and fucled them under false pretenses. FRANCE is an example of a place where there is no threat of Violence if a woman is not a Virgin, a place where women do NOT have to marry if they do not want to. And yet women are practicing the same kind of FRAUD and the PC Liberals still try to justify it: <http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1213871239419&pagename=Zone-English-Living_Shariah%2FLSELayout> =================================================================== =================================================================== A court in the northern city of Lille has annulled the marriage of a young Muslim couple after the groom complained his bride was not virgin as she claimed to be. The husband said his bride had deceived him on "one of the essential elements" of the marriage. The bride acknowledged that she had led her groom to believe that she was a virgin when she had already had sexual intercourse. ... "politicians, feminists, and rights activists saw the ruling as an affront to the legal equality of men and women and a violation of a woman's privacy," reported Times. The protests continue. "[I'm] shocked to see that today in France the civil law can be used to diminish the status of women," Valerie Letard, Minister for Women's Rights, said. (Times) ... It is interesting to note here that the virginity issue is highlighted and not the deception itself. Although we don't know if the intention of the bride was deception, never the less, in any case involving deception, courts of law in any country would annul a contract when it is based on such, and the accused party admits the guilt. "The sexuality of women in France is a private and free matter," said feminist Elisabeth Badinter. "The annulment will just serve to send young Muslim girls running to hospitals to have their hymens restored," she claimed. =================================================================== =================================================================== So... can we agree that it would be proper to criminalize the USE of Fraud Kits IN FRANCE? And perhaps also in Egypt, or some other countries, if it is shown that, like France, they do not in fact use Violence against non-Virgins who do not use FRAUD to hide their sluthood from prospective Contractors? --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, Ann Morgan <septit...@...> wrote: > > I think I should point out what ought to be obvious, that in a great many > cases, the use of these kits is not, in fact, an *initiation* of fraud, which > would be a violation of the ZAP (zero aggression policy) which forbids the > *initiation* of force, or fraud. > > The reason why, has to do with both the ZAP, and the idiotic culture which > exists in Egypt and other such countries. The ZAP proscribes the initiation > of force or fraud, or the THREAT of initiation of force or fraud. It does NOT > proscribe the use of force or fraud as a *response*, once someone else has > used, or threatened to use, force or fraud. > > Now, the culture in Egypt and other such countries is such, that a woman who > has sex outside marriage, if this is found out, will have force initiated > against HER, which is, in fact, a violation of the ZAP. To be specific, > she will be killed, if not be her present or future husband, than by a mob > led by self-appointed mullahs. And this will happen regardless of whether > she is married, single, or chooses to get married in the future. > > The fact that a woman chooses to have sex does not violate the rights of > anyone else, regardless of what the mullahs or other idiots in such countries > think. Since a woman can expect, in such countries, to be killed if this is > discovered, the *initiation* of a threat of violence against her is pretty > much a given. Therefore, such kits, although a fraud, are not an INITIATION > of fraud. They are a use of fraud in response to a previously existing threat > of an initiation of force, and the use of such kits to prevent herself from > being killed is no more a violation of the ZAP than it would be for such a > woman to suddenly pull out a machine gun on a mullah-led mob threatening to > stone her to death. >
