The Non-Aggression Principle Just Does Not Work

[FTL_Ian]

Joey accidently picked the Free State Project when he should have chosen the Christian Exodus...it seems more his speed.

[J’raxis 270145]

Joey accidently picked the Free State Project when he should have chosen the Christian Exodus...it seems more his speed.

I seem to remember that when he came back to the forum a few months ago, he said he'd "grown up." Looks like he has a bit more growing up to do, still...

[Coconut]

Joey accidently picked the Free State Project when he should have chosen the Christian Exodus...it seems more his speed.

hmm. That is an extremely interesting site. Too bad it's not updated more often and I have no idea what "Activism" they actually do.

However, it would be a good reference to begin the process of showing Christians that the Bible and Jesus actually would support non-violence and forgiveness, rather than legislating morality.

Edit: ok well some of it is nuts, but still...

[KBCraig]

Joey's definition of "Just Does Not Work" is, "People are still doing Stuff I Don't Like, therefore I have no choice but to initiate force to make them stop."

[Riddler]

Mods:  I'd like him banned for threatening violence against me.

no violence noted.
i'll fucking step in.

[Riddler]

How do you equate child porn with the NAP?  I believe in the NAP, but I've never seen child porn, nor do I condone it.  They are totally different and unrelated things.  To suggest that believing in the NAP means that you support child porn is asinine and ridiculous.  If you wanted to debate what the punishment should be for possessing child porn, I think that would be a more sensible thing to rant about.  It is silly to spew a rant criticizing the NAP because there may be someone who expresses support for the NAP and believes that child porn is not a form of aggression,

The point is that the logical conclusion of NAP is that there is no force involved in:

1. anything you want to do with your property (animals)
2. anything you want to do with another person who capable of consenting (children)

The question then regarding child porn is...at what age can a child consent and how to enforce without violating NAP.

am i reading you wrong, or are you really a fucked-up motherfucker, with respect to children/porn???

[John]

 

[John]

Non-aggression works for me. But maybe that's just because I chose to live that way.
Ever tried it? Maybe you should. 

[BillKauffman]

How do you equate child porn with the NAP?  I believe in the NAP, but I've never seen child porn, nor do I condone it.  They are totally different and unrelated things.  To suggest that believing in the NAP means that you support child porn is asinine and ridiculous.  If you wanted to debate what the punishment should be for possessing child porn, I think that would be a more sensible thing to rant about.  It is silly to spew a rant criticizing the NAP because there may be someone who expresses support for the NAP and believes that child porn is not a form of aggression,

The point is that the logical conclusion of NAP is that there is no force involved in:

1. anything you want to do with your property (animals)
2. anything you want to do with another person who capable of consenting (children)

The question then regarding child porn is...at what age can a child consent and how to enforce without violating NAP.

am i reading you wrong, or are you really a fucked-up motherfucker, with respect to children/porn???

Did you read the next sentence after what you emboldened?

[Peacemaker]

Joey accidently picked the Free State Project when he should have chosen the Christian Exodus...it seems more his speed.

Great recommendation Ian!  I hope he checks it out because it Truly does line up much better with his morality (i.e.; He has No Problem Initiating the use of Physical Force against those peaceful people he Disagrees with (or the Revolvers were made Ruling School of Thought).

Funny how the Ones (supporting) Pointing/Using the Guns, don't have / see a problem with it and really think they are "Peaceful" (yeah right!) ideal Citizens. 

But I think the Game is about to be up because more and more people are seeing the Government for what it is (Obama has been doing Tremendous work in this area!); a Self Serving Money Machine that uses Violence to guarantee everyone gets paid. 

Joey wants to give himself a label for his political beliefs and I"d like to offer some free unsolicited advice:  He should use: RepubliKrat, because he's definitely not a DemAKan.

[Riddler]

How do you equate child porn with the NAP?  I believe in the NAP, but I've never seen child porn, nor do I condone it.  They are totally different and unrelated things.  To suggest that believing in the NAP means that you support child porn is asinine and ridiculous.  If you wanted to debate what the punishment should be for possessing child porn, I think that would be a more sensible thing to rant about.  It is silly to spew a rant criticizing the NAP because there may be someone who expresses support for the NAP and believes that child porn is not a form of aggression,

The point is that the logical conclusion of NAP is that there is no force involved in:

1. anything you want to do with your property (animals)
2. anything you want to do with another person who capable of consenting (children)

The question then regarding child porn is...at what age can a child consent and how to enforce without violating NAP.

am i reading you wrong, or are you really a fucked-up motherfucker, with respect to children/porn???

Did you read the next sentence after what you emboldened?

yeah....i get it.
the ''wrong'' part of all this should be startlingly clear to ANYONE any >normal< human being: that is, the words
CHILD.....and PORN in the same-fucking-sentence...
that you even wonder about such things, should be a big fucking red flag

[BillKauffman]

How do you equate child porn with the NAP?  I believe in the NAP, but I've never seen child porn, nor do I condone it.  They are totally different and unrelated things.  To suggest that believing in the NAP means that you support child porn is asinine and ridiculous.  If you wanted to debate what the punishment should be for possessing child porn, I think that would be a more sensible thing to rant about.  It is silly to spew a rant criticizing the NAP because there may be someone who expresses support for the NAP and believes that child porn is not a form of aggression,

The point is that the logical conclusion of NAP is that there is no force involved in:

1. anything you want to do with your property (animals)
2. anything you want to do with another person who capable of consenting (children)

The question then regarding child porn is...at what age can a child consent and how to enforce without violating NAP.

am i reading you wrong, or are you really a fucked-up motherfucker, with respect to children/porn???

Did you read the next sentence after what you emboldened?

yeah....i get it.
the ''wrong'' part of all this should be startlingly clear to ANYONE any >normal< human being: that is, the words
CHILD.....and PORN in the same-fucking-sentence...
that you even wonder about such things, should be a big fucking red flag

Listen up Asshat...

My belief is that children can't consent.

Stop replying with what you would have wanted me to write to fulfill some some sort of prurient interest on your part while trying to ascribe those motives to me please.

[John Edward Mercier]

The problem I believe to be the understanding of property rights not derived from a State statute.
Imagine how complex it is over the internet to explain common vs. State-enforced exclusive property... personal property vs. real property... then to explain the difference between stewardship vs. ownership.

[ByronB]

Can one make child porn without initiation of force or fraud?


I'm not sure that's possible.  I guess it depends on what your definitions are.  Kids will run around naked voluntarily.  It can take a great deal of effort, with some, to get them to keep their clothes *on*.  If you snap pictures of this, is it porn?  I don't  know.  Is it aggression?  Probably not.

Then again, there are ages at which a child will not consent to sexual activity.  They just don't have the interest.  If you forced them into such behavior, would it be aggression?  Of course.  Would pictures of it be porn?  I don't know.  I doubt it would do anything for me.  But what would the problem be?  I'd argue that the primary problem would be the act of violence, not the pictures thereof.  War correspondents take pictures of violence all the time.  Some sickos might get a charge out of the pictures.  But the real problem is not the pictures, or the fact that some sickos might get a charge out of the pictures, but the fact of the violence itself.

I think that this sums it up quite nicely to its logical conclusion for me.

If one were to conclude that possession child porn in of itself was a crime serious enough to pursue to its ends then you can bet that the internet as we know it will cease to exist... how far are people willing to go with this because there is NO logical end; mothers taking pictures of themselves nursing there baby, children (ANYONE under 18) taking pictures of themselves, anyone in the medical field for children, museums that have preserved fetuses (and anyone that takes pictures of them), anyone who would DARE film a birth, images that are preserved in your brain after accidentally seeing child porn  (make it so that parents have to have their memory erased after every diaper they change)... yeah I'm with joey, screw NAP lets send them ALL to the gas chambers.

[BillKauffman]

how far are people willing to go with this because there is NO logical end; mothers taking pictures of themselves nursing there baby, children (ANYONE under 18) taking pictures of themselves, anyone in the medical field for children, museums that have preserved fetuses (and anyone that takes pictures of them), anyone who would DARE film a birth, images that are preserved in your brain after accidentally seeing child porn  (make it so that parents have to have their memory erased after every diaper they change)... yeah I'm with joey, screw NAP lets send them ALL to the gas chambers.

None of this is based on force or fraud...