Debate : Search Results: all rights are property rights


Off-Topic / Debate / Search Results: all rights are property rights

Results 41 – 60 of about 12000.

Search took 0.02 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Re: Yahoo Sucks
(...) No it wouldn't. The US government, and all lesser related governments (states, counties, cities, townships, etc.) are restricted from making laws that prohibit free speech on public property. No such restrictions are made for private/corporate (...) (21 years ago, 5-Jul-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

all, rights, property
(score: 6.009)

		Re: Art? or Theft? or just signs that NPR is damaged.
(...) Take your time with a response, if any. LEGOWORLD understandably takes precedence over OT ruminations... (...) The bogging appears to focus on how wrong her act was/is, rather than on whether or not it is wrong in some absolute sense. To (...) (21 years ago, 13-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 6.008)

		Re: An armed society...
(...) But according to the Constitution, it is the Court that is empowered to interpret the law. (...) I've had a small and far-too-late epiphany on this matter, or at least on how to articulate my feelings about it, so I think I might finally have (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jan-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 6.006)

		Infinite Justice
Infinite Justice. Has anyone noticed the peculiar nature of those words? It sounds very like what was imagined as a perpetual war in the essay within a novel, "The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism" by Emmanual Goldstein that resides (...) (23 years ago, 20-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 6.006)

		Re: The nature of property (was: Idiots, Part Deux)
I have decided that it makes the most sense for me to stop talking about space in the universe and just talk about land. Bear in mind that I think the argument extrapolates out to all habitable space, but for now, talking about land might be easier. (...) (22 years ago, 14-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 6.005)

		Re: Uhh, back to tax again ;-) (Was Re: Is space property?)
(...) I agree that I am sort-of legally _not_ entitled to those portions of my personal property. There are some problems in the US with whether the income tax is actually legal, but I suppose that's an issue for an other time. My claims that (...) (24 years ago, 3-Jan-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 6.005)

		Re: Abortion, consistent with the LP stance? (Re: From Harry Browne
Please note in the following discussion that my own feelings on when if ever abortion is appropriate are very undecided. The following is a thought exercise. Don't assume that just because I make a statement below that it equates to how I really (...) (24 years ago, 11-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 6.004)

		Please make a donation via Paypal to the Red Cross!
I am sure that most of us received the following message from Paypal If possible, please make a donation, even the smallest amounts count. There will always be someone in need who could use everthing possible right now. I am just about to donate (...) (23 years ago, 14-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.loc.au, lugnet.general)

all, rights, property
(score: 6.002)

		Re: Does it pay to be a Patriot?
(...) Well, they certainly want to be freemen, one of the 22 enumerated statuses of persons in the U.S. Constitution, and that is a worthy goal. But... Patriots, as both you and the govt. call them, are probably a very misunderstood group. Many of (...) (23 years ago, 5-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 6.002)

		Re: Vegetarianism etc. (was: Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?)
(...) It still has enormous theological value; the difference is that it is now read and understood in light of our fuller understanding of God as compiled in the New Testament. (...) Ok...I concede the point that it was inconsistent to include (...) (24 years ago, 1-Jun-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 6.001)

		Re: Why is cockfighting bad? (was: Pokemon (was: Harry Potter Lego Line))
(...) If (...) in (...) resorting (...) Clever enough to balance our diets and clever enough to invent and operate a food production system that can produce all the food (and more) that we need without killing (well, I supose tractors do kill field (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jul-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 6.000)

		Re: Questions about the nature of property rights (was Re: ("life affirming" == "no initiation of force") == "all rigihts are property rights"?)
I'd like to introduce some terminology. The rights [1] in my earlier message I'd like to call "basic property rights" [2]. That is: * The right to, through interacting constructively with things in the universe, mark those things as mine. * The (...) (25 years ago, 10-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 5.061)

		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 (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 5.058)

		Questions about the nature of property rights (was Re: ("life affirming" == "no initiation of force") == "all rigihts are property rights"?)
I see at least four distinct potential abilities related to property. I don't believe that any of these can be derived from any other. These may or may not be things that one can do with property (or, ahem, properties of property), and there may or (...) (25 years ago, 9-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 5.054)

		Re: ("life affirming" == "no initiation of force") == "all rigihts are property rights"?
(...) Me: Right R exists. You: Right R interferes with property rights and therefore can't exist. Me: Wait, you haven't show that property rights exist. You: Yes I did; it's proven because (of a string of logic assuming) R doesn't exist. That's (...) (25 years ago, 9-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 5.050)

		Re: Questions about the nature of property rights (was Re: ("life affirming" == "no initiation of force") == "all rigihts are property rights"?)
Ok. Here's some thoughts on answers to my own questions. I should start by saying that I'm not here assuming that property is a natural right -- it seems to be constructed. Nonetheless, much of this applies either way. I'd still like Larry and (...) (25 years ago, 10-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 5.048)

		Re: Questions about the nature of property rights (was Re: ("life affirming" == "no initiation of force") == "all rigihts are property rights"?)
I realized that last night I failed to address an important question I'd raised earlier: (...) The ideas I've expressed <URL:(URL) apply only to the physical universe -- that is, matter (and potentially energy, because of that equivalence thing). (...) (25 years ago, 10-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 5.048)

		Matthew jumps in (was Re: Goodness of Man?, etc.)
(...) I don't understand the basis for the assertion that property rights are the basis for all other rights. Where do property rights come from? What makes that a privledged right above any other I can imagine? Arguments for this I've seen that I (...) (25 years ago, 6-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 5.048)

		Re: ("life affirming" == "no initiation of force") == "all rigihts are property rights"?
(...) 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 (...) (25 years ago, 8-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 5.047)

		Re: ("life affirming" == "no initiation of force") == "all rigihts are property rights"?
(...) It still shows some strange attachment to the concept of property. For one thing, what's this "trade" stuff? But more deeply, I think you're assuming that force necessarily relates to property. I don't think it must. For example, if it's in my (...) (25 years ago, 9-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

all, rights, property
(score: 5.046)

More: Next Page >>