Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Old Hoosier Apologizes to Libertarians
Thread from yesterday ^ | 3-26 | TOH

Posted on 03/26/2002 7:30:11 AM PST by The Old Hoosier

Yesterday, I got into an argument with some libertarians. I promised to humiliate myself if they could answer the following question:

If I want to sell myself into slavery in order to pay off debts, why should the government be able to prevent me? Why should I not have every right to enter into an indissoluble contract surrendering my freedom--temporarily or permanently--to someone else in exchange for some consideration?

I hereby admit that I was wrong, because ThomasJefferson agreed that the government should have no power to prohibit voluntary slavery--a step that I did not think any of them would want to take. I hereby eat crow. (Tpaine and Eagle Eye still haven't given direct answers, but I'll mention it here when they do, and eat more crow.)

The relevant part of the long argument we had is here. TJ agrees to voluntary slavery at 374.


TOPICS: Free Republic; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: indenturedservitude; libertarian; sasu
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 261-267 next last
To: The Old Hoosier
Why are you apologizing to the Libs? Unless they win a court case making you apologize (in monetary terms, of course), then you don't have to do it. That's the way they like to do things.
161 posted on 03/27/2002 11:28:43 AM PST by Moonman62
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Khepera
The Constitution is WHOLLY relevant to our situation today. The Bible is a wonderful book and God IS in charge overall. However, He gave US the power and authority to run our own lives, so our Constitution is very relevant to that end. Don't get carried away here and start name-calling and call it Holy. You are wrong if you do.
162 posted on 03/27/2002 11:33:21 AM PST by dcwusmc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Have you decided which of the facts in post 104 or post 107 you disagree with yet?

I'm tired of your evasive tactics of attack, attack, attack in an effort to draw attention away from the fact that you've never answered the initial question that was posed when you attacked my first post.

163 posted on 03/27/2002 11:35:50 AM PST by Equality 7-2521
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: The Green Goblin
In the beginning I wasn't even brushing strokes at all Green Goblin until I lurked on reading their positions. Especially regarding drugs!

I actually first read their threads thinking they were these "super" conservatives based on the LIBERTARIAN name. My mouth dropped as I read their posts. To say I was shocked by them would be an understatement.

So I read and formed my opinion after reading Libertarian posters. I started with being impressed by them by their name and my opinion of them dropped as I read what they thought about different topics. Morally most of them remind me of Bill Clinton! IMO

Have a good day, I have to leave to eat fulfill my current obligations.

164 posted on 03/27/2002 11:38:14 AM PST by A CA Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Equality 7-2521
Equating our military to a slaveholder and miltary service to slavery or even civil contract is tired and inane.

Selective Draft Law Cases, 245 U.S. 366 (1918). The Court's analysis, in full, of the Thirteenth Amendment issue raised by a compulsory military draft was the following: ''As we are unable to conceive upon what theory the exaction by government from the citizen of the performance of his supreme and noble duty of contributing to the defense of the rights and honor of the nation, as the result of a war declared by the great representative body of the people, can be said to be the imposition of involuntary servitude in violation of the prohibitions of the Thirteenth Amendment, we are constrained to the conclusion that the contention to that effect is refuted by its mere statement.''

Chattel slavery may be permissible in Somalia or a piece of Rand pulp fiction. It's illegal here in America.

165 posted on 03/27/2002 11:43:19 AM PST by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
I'm not talking about what the United States Government is allowed to do under the Constitution. I'm talking theory here. Sheesh!
166 posted on 03/27/2002 11:43:47 AM PST by Redcloak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: A CA Guy
Over the years, their platforms have become more heavily obfuscated. As people who thought they were Libertarians found out what the party actually stood for, they would leave. Thus the endless spamming for new suckers.

Kinda like Scientology.

167 posted on 03/27/2002 11:47:55 AM PST by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 164 | View Replies]

To: Redcloak
In theory and in fact, it would be better for America to be governed by law than by whims.
168 posted on 03/27/2002 11:49:48 AM PST by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
Since "whim" is a synonym for "personal freedom", I can fully understand what you're saying.
169 posted on 03/27/2002 11:56:49 AM PST by Redcloak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: Redcloak
Freedom built on a foundation of shifting sands doesn't last long.

As you can see on this thread, Libertarian zealots have little difficulty rationalizing the reinstitution of chattel slavery based upon their whims.

170 posted on 03/27/2002 12:00:34 PM PST by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: Redcloak
I'm trying to see whether it's fair for me to say that Libertarians support the return of indentured servitude. Based on this thread, they seem to support the idea, with the exception of tpaine, who seems to depart from libertarian ideology to justify his opposition. But I'm still waiting for others to clarify their position. I don't want to be unfair in characterizing people, which is why everything has been done in the open on the forum.
171 posted on 03/27/2002 12:12:15 PM PST by The Old Hoosier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: tpaine
I made my original points in 3 posts on the first page of this thread and repeating them now is redundant. But I am still lost as to the point of this whole thread. The arguement or contention has not been clearly made.

First of all lets look at history.

If there was anytime that small "l" libertarianism was in the forefront of political power it was at the time of the writing and approval of the Constitution. George Mason and P. Henry, the most promenant amongst the Anti-Federalists published countless papers about the preservation of rights in the new draft.

Mason left the Convention at its end and didn't return to sign the document for two reasons. The first was slavery, an institution he despised and didn't want to see extended in the new repbulic (despite having been a slave owner). The second was disgust that the time wouldn't be taken to write in a Bill of Rights prior to the issuance of the Constitution.

When Madison, using Mason's Declaration of Rights for Virginaia, later authored and introduced a bill of rights, Mason was asked if he was now content. He answered that it wasn't extensive enough and perhaps it should have had about thirteen instead of the final ten.

Just prior to his death he was more charitable as to what he and his fellows had acomplished but the contribution of the Anti-Federalists helped produce a better republic.

Now, as that has been one of the closest instances of Libertarian political power in action, I think it absurb to contend that today's libertarian philosophy wouldn't have produced the Amendments utilized in outlawing slavery, because they wanted such in there to begin with as shown by the actual record.

I have many times found myself on the opposite side of the arguement from you but in this case no one has laid a glove on you.

If a poster wants to contend that libertarians rely too heavily on a society based on Contract....make that arguement, cite the examples and I might even agree. But to slam libertarians for something they historically, the one time they were a potent force, tried to prevent is ridiculous.

172 posted on 03/27/2002 12:18:46 PM PST by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: dcwusmc
Name calling? Call what holy? I only call the bible holy. The Constitution is worthless as a guarantee of your rights as has been proven by our present situation. I am merely saying that the Libertarians are worshiping the wrong gods and our rights are secure in our Lord. The Libertarians advocate doing more harm to our society then what they are proposing that is good. They are proposing some very liberal policies and If I want those I would vote Democrat. I vote for conservative candidates who honor our traditions or I don't vote. I also speak out against liberals. I have not called anyone names here except the Libertarian party in general. They have not reciprocated since they have been very personal indeed. My criticism has been of their policies. At no time have I said hey you're stupid. Nor have I depicted any one as a retarded redneck or fool. You will find several such references to me in that manor right here on this thread.
173 posted on 03/27/2002 12:22:22 PM PST by Khepera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: The Old Hoosier
I was writing 172 while you were posting 171 and didn't get a chance to read your amplification of your purpose.

I don't feel that I will ever understand libertarians. But that is my deficiency, not from their lack of trying, LOL.

Basically, your point is that your understanding of their current philosophy is that it would excuse contractural relationships like slavery?

If so, please post an example of where that extensive a view is espoused rather that trying to extrapolate their general statements to some end claim of your own.

174 posted on 03/27/2002 12:24:57 PM PST by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: The Old Hoosier
I'm all in favor of you being allowed to do whatever stupid thing you wish. So long as you hurt only yourself, it's no one else's business.
175 posted on 03/27/2002 12:26:10 PM PST by Redcloak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

Comment #176 Removed by Moderator

To: KC Burke
All rights are inextricably linked with property rights. Such rights as the freedom from involuntary servitude as well as the freedom of speech and the freedom of press are based on self-ownership. Our bodies are our property every bit as much as is justly acquired land or material objects.

We further hold that the owners of property have the full right to control, use, dispose of, or in any manner enjoy, their property without interference, until and unless the exercise of their control infringes the valid rights of others.

1994 National Platform of the Libertarian Party
Adopted in Convention, September 1993, Salt Lake City, Utah


177 posted on 03/27/2002 12:32:04 PM PST by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]

To: Redcloak
Actions have consequences. Legalizing peonage, indentured servitude and other forms of contract and chattel slavery would have a devastating impact on our nation.

How many civil wars do you want?

178 posted on 03/27/2002 12:35:25 PM PST by Roscoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
and they go on to amplify "dispose of" in relation to euthenasia etc. correct. But where do they claim the such disposal can be made to violate what in the previous paragraph they refer to as a prohibition? I don't get it.
179 posted on 03/27/2002 12:36:48 PM PST by KC Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: Roscoe
You sure do have the hots for a nanny state, don't ya?
180 posted on 03/27/2002 12:37:42 PM PST by Redcloak
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200 ... 261-267 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson