| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > LP POINT 2
> >
> >
> > Larry
> > If an individual were to find him/herself in your propertyist dreamland with
> > no food, no water, no education, no money, no property and starving. What
> > rights would he/she have? Which right would be strongest:
> >
> > 1. The right of the property owner to shoot him/her for trespass
> > 2. The right to sustenance?
>
> One point at a time, sorry.
This is an easy one Larry - One or Two, whats is gonna be?
Would a starving man/woman have a right to food?
Scott A
>
> But in the meantime, you can either apply first principles and derive your
> own answer, or you can read old threads, where something very like this was
> discussed, at length.
>
> Check your assumptions, though. They aren't clearly stated.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: LP POINT 2
|
| (...) What's so hard to understand about one point at a time? Did you want to give up on your other two for now and talk about this one? I am taking them in your numbering order. This bears repeating, though... (...) as does this... (...) ++Lar (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: LP POINT 2
|
| (...) One point at a time, sorry. But in the meantime, you can either apply first principles and derive your own answer, or you can read old threads, where something very like this was discussed, at length. Check your assumptions, though. They (...) (24 years ago, 27-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
6 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
|
|
|
|
