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 / 3425
3424  |  3426
Subject: 
Re: ("life affirming" == "no initiation of force") == "all rigihts are property rights"?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Sat, 8 Jan 2000 07:55:24 GMT
Reply-To: 
mattdm@&avoidspam&mattdm.org
Viewed: 
353 times
  
Matthew Miller <mattdm@mattdm.org> wrote:
I accept the force-initiation test as an argument for whether something is
good, not whether it is a potential right. I don't think we've gotten to the
point (in our discussion here; not necessarily in general *grin*) where we
can distiguish between the two yet.

For clarification -- I do assert that all the rights in my initial list pass
the force-initiation test [1] (as Larry asked that they do) in the absence
of at least one separate and additional property right.


[1] although not necessarily any other test which may exist for "goodness"

--
Matthew Miller                      --->                  mattdm@mattdm.org
Quotes 'R' Us                       --->             http://quotes-r-us.org/



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: ("life affirming" == "no initiation of force") == "all rigihts are property rights"?
 
(...) No no. I didn't agree to that at all. Your question was "What sorts of rights are not property rights but do not require force initiation?" Eliminating answers simply because they fail the force-initiation test is begging the question. I (...) (24 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

29 Messages in This Thread:










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

Custom Search

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