Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> But, that's only because you prefer a government
>> which will impose one set of definitions upon all -- yours.
>>
>>
>
> You will probably appreciate the cartoon on this site
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> But, that's only because you prefer a government
> which will impose one set of definitions upon all -- yours.
>
You will probably appreciate the cartoon on this site:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/freeto
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Zack Bass wrote:
>
> > Problem is, according to your statements,
> > your guys are gonna start shooting at my guys,
> > and mine are gonna try to shoot back.
> >
>
> Well, that is one way of settling it,
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Zack Bass wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I am clearing up just how our "libertarianisms" differ.
>>> Mine is NAP (Principled), yours is... something
>>> else, full of Sentimentalism and Es
Grown-ups do not need Seat Belts on their Contracts. Leave Consenting
Adults alone to conduct their affairs as they see fit, no matter how
"invalid" YOU think their Agreements are.
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Zack Bass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> --- In LibertarianEnt
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Back to taxation, aside from my eternal skepticism on the subject, if
> the 'taxation' is for a specified and limited term and for a specified
> and verifiable purpose it sounds more like a valid contract.
Jeez, your post below was at 8:15 PM today, and my post defining what
I mean by "Voluntary Taxation" was at 7:37, just 38 minutes earlier,
so there ain't all that many posts to go back to find it.
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Zack Bass wrote:
>
> > I am clearing up just how our "libertarianisms" differ.
> > Mine is NAP (Principled), yours is... something
> > else, full of Sentimentalism and Esthetics.
>
> Au contraire. Been th
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> A libertarian community is likely to recognize Property, including
>>> Bodies and Body Parts, and the right to buy, sell, rent, and otherwise
>>> bargain with all Property. A NAP
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> It occurs to me that you may be conflating the concepts "honor" and
>> "contract".
>>
>>
>
> Nope.
>
>
>> Honor is an extra added attraction.
>> And if it has to be enforc
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> Nora wants THAT Kidney - it is the only one that matches
>>> hers adequately.
>>>
>>
>> Ah, donkey poop.
>>
>>
>
>
> You have not heard of Tissue Matching? It was
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> You will notice that it
>> contains no definition of "Voluntary Taxation."
>>
>>
>>> That one agrees to be Taxed in a certain manner,
>>> and thenceforth cannot avoid being
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > A libertarian community is likely to recognize Property, including
> > Bodies and Body Parts, and the right to buy, sell, rent, and otherwise
> > bargain with all Property. A NAP-libertarian community wil
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hey, don't blame me for Nora's inability
> to write a good contract.
> As I mentioned earlier in this discussion,
> she should have "made sure of the goods" first.
> That is, made sure that the kidney in qu
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> We were discussing a libertaria; not nazis, not a sleazy third world
>> country, or an unenlightened age.
>>
>>
>
> A libertarian community is likely to recognize Property, i
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Zack wrote:
>>
>>
>>> And, of course, there are bleeding hearts
>>> like you trying to close that avenue to the
>>> poor desperate men trying to help their families.
>>>
>>
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It occurs to me that you may be conflating the concepts "honor" and
> "contract".
>
Nope.
>
> Honor is an extra added attraction.
> And if it has to be enforced, it ain't honor.
>
Fine, but I am a Cont
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Nora wants THAT Kidney - it is the only one that matches
> > hers adequately.
>
> Ah, donkey poop.
>
You have not heard of Tissue Matching? It was in all the papers.
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>> Ordinarily I should expect that you get to
>>> take the TV - SPECIFICALLY - as in
>>> SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE - rather than
>>> suing me for the Money.
>>> Same as if I mortgaged or
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > ==
> > ==
> > If the GOODS [KIDNEY] are identified to the contract for sale
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >in the event that Oscar's all of wealth is
> > insufficient to pay for a proper Kidney for Nora,
> > then there is no "adequate remedy" other
> > than Specific Performance, which Oscar IS capable
> > of pr
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I am going to quote extensively from the
>> wikipedia article that can be
>> found here.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_performance
>>
>>
>
>
> Not extensively eno
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You will notice that it
> contains no definition of "Voluntary Taxation."
>
> > That one agrees to be Taxed in a certain manner,
> > and thenceforth cannot avoid being Taxed in that manner.
>
Yes, the pl
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> [Common Law:] "Orders of specific performance are
>> granted when damages are not an adequate remedy"
>> ...
>> If the Nora/Oscar case landed in my court,
>> and if Oscar were un
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Zack Bass wrote:
>>
>>> And the same answer for Voluntary Taxation?
>>> Or is that something that
>>> is not "inalienable".
>>>
>>>
>> Can't say without knowing you
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> We were discussing a libertaria; not nazis, not a sleazy third world
> country, or an unenlightened age.
>
A libertarian community is likely to recognize Property, including
Bodies and Body Parts, and the
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Zack wrote:
>
> > And, of course, there are bleeding hearts
> > like you trying to close that avenue to the
> > poor desperate men trying to help their families.
> >
> Please direct me to the note I wrot
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Ordinarily I should expect that you get to
> > take the TV - SPECIFICALLY - as in
> > SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE - rather than
> > suing me for the Money.
> > Same as if I mortgaged or pawned or otherwise
> > p
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I am going to quote extensively from the
> wikipedia article that can be
> found here.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_performance
>
Not extensively enough, it turns out. A couple of paragraphs
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Can we agree that some sense of proportion is indicated?
>> For instance, if you're five days late making the twenty
>> dollar payment on your TV rental agreement, I don't get
>> t
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> The scenario is unrealistic.
>> Organ banks wouldn't survive if they
>> accepted Jane's organs from you.
>>
>>
>
> Again, you need to get out more. You have no idea how the
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [Common Law:] "Orders of specific performance are
> granted when damages are not an adequate remedy"
> ...
> If the Nora/Oscar case landed in my court,
> and if Oscar were unwilling
> to pay for a kidney
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Zack Bass wrote:
> > And the same answer for Voluntary Taxation?
> > Or is that something that
> > is not "inalienable".
> >
> Can't say without knowing your idea of
> "Voluntary Taxation." Any way you
Zack Bass wrote:
> And the same answer for Voluntary Taxation? Or is that something that
> is not "inalienable".
>
Can't say without knowing your idea of "Voluntary Taxation." Any way
you look at it, I figure "taxation" is always suspect: guilty until
proven innocent.
> I think it's bette
Zack Bass wrote:
> Gary wrote:
>
>> Zack wrote:
>>
>>> so Nora does what Oscar wants, but then
>>> he says, "I decided I don't want to give
>>> you any stinkin Kidneys, so blow it out your ass!"
>>> Jane is going to DIE full of Oscar's filthy semen,
>>> alienated from her true love Paul,
That still leaves the matter of the Back Rent. We noght consider
howit is done today, and how we would change that.
Today, in this place, you can Sue for Rent and get a Judgment for
Money. Once you have that Judgment, you can take pretty much anything
the guy Owns and auction it off to get your
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Can we agree that some sense of proportion is indicated?
> For instance, if you're five days late making the twenty
> dollar payment on your TV rental agreement, I don't get
> to come in and blow you away b
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The scenario is unrealistic.
> Organ banks wouldn't survive if they
> accepted Jane's organs from you.
>
Again, you need to get out more. You have no idea how the world
works. You cannot imagine how an
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> The issue I've been
>> exploring with Zack involves the limitations of contract.
>>
>>
>
> Here's where we have gotten so far, I think:
> You feel that the only thing that a
And the same answer for Voluntary Taxation? Or is that something that
is not "inalienable".
I think it's better to consider a man's Body as his Possession - and
like all Possessions, it is his to bargain with. Otherwise what good
is it? Why can't a man have the right to give his Life for his F
Gary wrote:
>
> Zack wrote:
> > so Nora does what Oscar wants, but then
> > he says, "I decided I don't want to give
> > you any stinkin Kidneys, so blow it out your ass!"
> > Jane is going to DIE full of Oscar's filthy semen,
> > alienated from her true love Paul, unless some
> > kind Arbitrator
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I have no problem with consensual acts of any kind, not
>> even b&d or s&m or voluntary "sex slavery."
>> The issue I've been exploring with Zack involves
>> the limitations of co
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The issue I've been
> exploring with Zack involves the limitations of contract.
>
Here's where we have gotten so far, I think:
You feel that the only thing that a person may be FORCED to pay up as
a resu
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have no problem with consensual acts of any kind, not
> even b&d or s&m or voluntary "sex slavery."
> The issue I've been exploring with Zack involves
> the limitations of contract.
>
I think this may
Ward,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> From: "Gary F. York" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>> I believe that's exactly what I said: "I do not consider any slavery
>> contract of any nature, including military conscription, to be valid."
>> Unless you have some argument why a "Sex Slave Contract" is not _r
From: "Gary F. York" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I believe that's exactly what I said: "I do not consider any slavery
> contract of any nature, including military conscription, to be valid."
> Unless you have some argument why a "Sex Slave Contract" is not _really_
> a "slavery contract" there shoul
Zack Bass wrote:
> "Gary F. York" wrote:
>
>> Zack Bass wrote:
>>
>>
>>> SO a society constructed as you desire would not
>>> consider a Sex Slave Contract an invalid Contract
>>> and would not consider Enforcement of it an
>>> Initiation Of Force?
>>>
>> I believe I've been clear;
"Gary F. York" wrote:
>
> Zack Bass wrote:
>
> > SO a society constructed as you desire would not
> > consider a Sex Slave Contract an invalid Contract
> > and would not consider Enforcement of it an
> > Initiation Of Force?
>
>I believe I've been clear; you are asking me
> to doubt your reading
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Zack Bass wrote:
> > --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> > wrote:
> >
> >> a society, constructed
> >> as I prefer, would not allow Jefferson to indulge
> >> all his less savory
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> only if 1. you desire their help in enforcing that contract
> ...
> you have repeatedly stated you have no interest in option 1.
>
No I have not. I am perfectly happy to ask my friends or employees to
he
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> You seem to suppose that I have a large degree
>> of reverence for Thomas Jefferson -- that I would
>> somehow feel inadequate if a society, constructed
>> as I prefer, would not a
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You seem to suppose that I have a large degree
> of reverence for Thomas Jefferson -- that I would
> somehow feel inadequate if a society, constructed
> as I prefer, would not allow Jefferson to indulge
> a
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Kevin is too stupid to believe.
>> Why is he messing around with Jane? Compassion?
>> I hardly think so.
>> If he wants a sex-slave, all he has to do is advertise.
>> Their seem t
Okay, let's see what your position really is and where it leads.
Now we consider Nora and Oscar.
Nora is an 18-year-old virgin who needs a kidney. She is engaged to
be married to Paul, who has only one kidney.
Oscar has a couple of kidneys that are a perfect match for Nora, but
he is very poor a
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Kevin is too stupid to believe.
> Why is he messing around with Jane? Compassion?
> I hardly think so.
> If he wants a sex-slave, all he has to do is advertise.
> Their seem to be plenty of Submissives who
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> advertise for a suicide who is willing to endure a little pain in order
>> to leave a nice bequest. All done up properly and well documented, I
>> wouldn't have a problem with t
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> The atrocities committed by Monarchies,
>> Theocracies and Communist societies can not be
>> committed by a community which does actually uphold
>> the libertarian standard of beh
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Kevin, were I (or my protection agency) in
>> charge of him, will be restrained -- at least until
>> the community can decide how much (if any) of Kevin's
>> remaining assets shoul
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I doubt you would be much amused if I decided, unilaterally, that you
>> owed me reparations and immediately proceeded to collect your organs,
>> and your life, with a knife.
>>
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> some AnCaps will allow retaliatory force in
>> excess of mere defense.
>>
>>
>
> "Will Allow"? Huh? How do they Allow one thing and not another?
> Isn't it supposed to be
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> You seem to imply that any standard of behavior is
>> equal to any other so therefore all standards are
>> alike and because some communities did wrong adhering
>> to their selecte
Zack Bass wrote:
> One pretty obvious problem with your "restraint" is that it has to be
> a LIFE SENTENCE.
>
Wherever did that conclusion come from? See the last quoted paragraph,
below.
G.
>
>
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
Curt Howland wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sunday 19 October 2008, Gary F. York was heard to say:
>
>> Then it seemed a bit presumptuous of me to submit an
>> article when I hadn't been much visible within the TLE community;
>>
>
> As somewhat of an "insi
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Zack,
>> Except for your bit about the Jew killer, I fully
>> agree with your comments.
>> ...
>> But after a person has already violated
>> NAP in such a manner as to make _hims
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> advertise for a suicide who is willing to endure a little pain in order
> to leave a nice bequest. All done up properly and well documented, I
> wouldn't have a problem with that -- assuming you (sorry,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 19 October 2008, Gary F. York was heard to say:
> Then it seemed a bit presumptuous of me to submit an
> article when I hadn't been much visible within the TLE community;
As somewhat of an "insider" in the TLE thing, I can tell you that
sub
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Zack Bass wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Oh, I see you didn't mean the Letter To The Editor, there is also an
>>> Article by him, as you said.
>>>
>>
>> You got it. First paragrap
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The atrocities committed by Monarchies,
> Theocracies and Communist societies can not be
> committed by a community which does actually uphold
> the libertarian standard of behavior.
>
There ya go! That
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Kevin, were I (or my protection agency) in
> charge of him, will be restrained -- at least until
> the community can decide how much (if any) of Kevin's
> remaining assets should go to compensate Jane's hei
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I doubt you would be much amused if I decided, unilaterally, that you
> owed me reparations and immediately proceeded to collect your organs,
> and your life, with a knife.
>
I wouldn't feel any better a
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> some AnCaps will allow retaliatory force in
> excess of mere defense.
>
"Will Allow"? Huh? How do they Allow one thing and not another?
Isn't it supposed to be a Free Market not only in Law ENFORCEMENT
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> You seem to imply that any standard of behavior is
> equal to any other so therefore all standards are
> alike and because some communities did wrong adhering
> to their selected behavioral standard therefo
One pretty obvious problem with your "restraint" is that it has to be
a LIFE SENTENCE.
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> Zack Bass wrote:
> > --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I al
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Do I consider 'punishment' and 'retaliation' Wrong?
> By my personal moral standard? Sometimes.
> More emphatically, I consider them unwise.
>
Fortunately, I can be unwise and still be a libertarian.
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Zack,
> Except for your bit about the Jew killer, I fully
> agree with your comments.
> ...
> But after a person has already violated
> NAP in such a manner as to make _himself_ scary,
> what you gonna do
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Zack Bass wrote:
>
> > Oh, I see you didn't mean the Letter To The Editor, there is also an
> > Article by him, as you said.
>
> You got it. First paragraph, predominantly.
> I'm confident you'll like --
Zack,
Except for your bit about the Jew killer, I fully agree with your comments.
Restraint _is_ scary; it is a can of worms. I cannot justify 'prior
restraint' nor do I want to. But after a person has already violated
NAP in such a manner as to make _himself_ scary, what you gonna do? In
e
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I already said I did not condone 'punishment' or 'retaliation'.
>>
>>
>
> Do you consider them "Wrong", or does "condone" have some special
> technical meaning here that has n
Zack Bass wrote:
> Oh, I see you didn't mean the Letter To The Editor, there is also an
> Article by him, as you said.
You got it. First paragraph, predominantly. I'm confident you'll like
-- well, most of it. Maybe all of it.
G.
Zack Bass wrote:
>
> This is a slippery Slope though:
> Imagine a community where there is only Restitution, and Laura wants
> to borrow $200,000 from Marty for a big beer party. She offers him
> more and more interest and other inducements, but he refuses to loan
> her the money, even though
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Zack Bass wrote:
>>
>>> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
it is just possibly a minimum
standard of behavior (n
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> ... when you say, "Morally Wrong" you really mean,
>> 'ethically incorrect'.
>>
>>
>
> Yes. Yes I do. I do not make a distinction.
> This one is probably just Semantics, no
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Zack Bass wrote:
> > --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Kevin, were I (or my protection agency) in charge of him, will be
> >> restrained
> >>
> >>
>
Oh, I see you didn't mean the Letter To The Editor, there is also an
Article by him, as you said. Yeah, you might attack some of that all
right.
The part where I disagree is that I maintain that Bigots can very well
be Libertarians, long as they don't try to Initiate Force. Such
things as Though
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It seems quite a lot of people don't even feel
> a little twinge when they "Initiate Force"
> Therefore it's objectively _not_ "Morally Wrong"
> for everyone. Q.E.D.
>
Sure it is. Wrong. Objectiv
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I've sent a "letter to the editor" re Jim Davidson's
> article last week that should make my opinions
> even more clear
>
This better be good. Aside from an irrational love of Gold (the
letter above his
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I already said I did not condone 'punishment' or 'retaliation'.
>
Do you consider them "Wrong", or does "condone" have some special
technical meaning here that has nothing to do with a Value Judgment?
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Zack Bass wrote:
> > --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> > wrote:
> >
> >> it is just possibly a minimum
> >> standard of behavior (not morals) that a great many
> >> people coul
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ... when you say, "Morally Wrong" you really mean,
> 'ethically incorrect'.
>
Yes. Yes I do. I do not make a distinction.
This one is probably just Semantics, not a real disagreement.
I do not use "mora
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I urge acceptance of NAP not because it is ultimately
>> the highest moral standard -- I very much doubt it is
>>
>>
>
> That is not the way you have been speaking. You have
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I argue from my own 'moral' intuitions;
>> I do not and have never claimed
>> them to be an objective standard.
>>
>>
>
> Objective schmobjective, when you argue for them you
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I urge acceptance of NAP not because it is ultimately
> the highest moral standard -- I very much doubt it is
>
That is not the way you have been speaking. You have definitely been
making VALUE JUDGMENTS
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I argue from my own 'moral' intuitions;
> I do not and have never claimed
> them to be an objective standard.
>
Objective schmobjective, when you argue for them you believe that they
are RIGHT, don't you?
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, Curt Howland
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> He still wants to shoot his neighbors for not painting
> their house or cutting their lawn.
>
You have me confused with someone entirely different.
I have never EVER said such a thing; indeed, I have often
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> Zack Bass wrote:
> > Yes, that was the way Curt quoted it.
Only seeing the endless and pointless replies to Zack's emails does
make things more difficult.
He still wants to shoot his neighbors for not painting their house or
cutting their lawn.
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> The point is that Kevin doesn't get to determine what is moral for all
>> others.
>>
>>
>
> Interesting theory.
> Is it possible that some Act is Immoral for one man but not
Zack Bass wrote:
> Yes, that was the way Curt quoted it. What he seemed to be
> attributing to you was said by me.
> I was just responding to HIS comment, and since I was not sure what
> the heck he was talking about I did not try to clean it up.
>
I believe you're right.
G.
>
>
> --- In Lib
Zack Bass wrote:
> --- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> A libertarian "NAP Justice League Agency" is not
>> and never can be _certain_ to be powerful enough
>>
>>
>
> But the question is, would you have a Moral Objection to such an
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, "Gary F. York"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The point is that Kevin doesn't get to determine what is moral for all
> others.
>
Interesting theory.
Is it possible that some Act is Immoral for one man but not Immoral
for another?
>
> And those other
Here is Curt's Comment exactly as he posted it:
--- In LibertarianEnterprise@yahoogroups.com, Curt Howland
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Thursday 09 October 2008, Gary F. York was heard to say:
> > > I said long ago that I would love to li
1 - 100 of 407 matches
Mail list logo
