To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 2264
2263  |  2265
Subject: 
Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Tue, 28 Sep 1999 05:55:30 GMT
Reply-To: 
johnneal@/antispam/uswest.net
Viewed: 
1078 times
  
Larry Pieniazek wrote:

John Neal wrote:

See above.  I'm sure I could get many to agree that the druggist's actions are
subhuman.

As with all these little morality puzzles, we don't have enough facts to
conclude that. For all we know, Heinz skipped buying health insurance to
cover the drug because he wanted to go bowling, or because he needed the
money to pay his last court fine for wife beating.

There is something sick and wrong with a system that values property
more than life.  What Libertarianism needs is a moral code.  As I have said
before, it needs Christianity. [1]

-John

[1] blatant troll to Lar, but seriously submitted as well.

And Lar rises to the bait.

Libertarianism and Christianity are not incompatible. Libertarianism
makes no statement about religion or internal belief systems. I know a
fair number of Christian Libertarians. (1) I just don't happen to be one
of them.

Libertarianism DOES have a moral code.

Even you are a little squeamish about the druggist's behaviour: "If I were he I'd
work out a payment plan blah blah blah"  And yet you cannot find anything morally
wrong in it, either.  It all works out logically (why he is justified to withhold
the drug), but in the end it just *seems* wrong somehow.  Why is that?  And
whatever that is, *you* are reacting to it as well by acting charitably if you were
the druggist.  Please explain.

-John

It's simple, really, and you
already know what the single axiom from which it all derives is.
Mandatory altruism just doesn't happen to be part of it.

Could it?  Should it?

1 - It is possible to live your life in a christian manner and yet not
violate the rights of your fellow travelers on this ball of rock. It's
just not possible to be, for example, a good Catholic, because to do so
means to support political actions by the Catholic church that are not
life affirming.

--
Larry Pieniazek larryp@novera.com  http://my.voyager.net/lar
- - - Web Application Integration! http://www.novera.com
fund Lugnet(tm): http://www.ebates.com/ Member ref: lar, 1/2 $$ to
lugnet.

NOTE: I have left CTP, effective 18 June 99, and my CTP email
will not work after then. Please switch to my Novera ID.



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
 
(...) There is a difference between holding and even publicising an opinion that the druggist is a slug, and using force to require him to sell the drug. There is nothing wrong with that opinion even being wrong (in the examples Larry stated of (...) (25 years ago, 28-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
 
(...) As with all these little morality puzzles, we don't have enough facts to conclude that. For all we know, Heinz skipped buying health insurance to cover the drug because he wanted to go bowling, or because he needed the money to pay his last (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

81 Messages in This Thread:



























Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR