[HumanaeVitae]

Wait a minute. I could find libertarians that would agree that the right to self-defense means that you have the right to have a nuclear weapon. So, you're limiting their liberty.

How about my second point? I call this the "Gunga Diner" example. We all know that medical schools give money to winos to have them sign a release stating that after they die, the med schools can use their cadavers for medical training. Right? Ok, now your standard for what government can and cannot do is the "non-initiation of force", right? And you support the right to freely contract, as long as a person is at an "age of reason", right?

So, what if there's a group of people that wants to eat humans after they die a natural death? Let's say I start a restaurant--the Gunga Diner--that voluntarily contracts with terminally ill people to sell their bodies (for--I don't know, $500 a pop?) for food after they die. Ok? Now, you as a libertarian should have no problem with this, right? No violence was initiated against the people agreeing (they weren't killed; they died of natural causes), and they freely contracted of their own free will. Why is this not okay? Or is it? Even more disgusting example--why shouldn't parents have the right to sell their deceased children to said diner? Their children are their "property", aren't they?

I hate to be so disgusting, but sometimes it's necessary.

[Roscoe]

Shouldn't people have a right to sell themselves into slavery under Libertarianism? And to own the resulting slaves?

[tpaine]

I hate to be so disgusting, but sometimes it's necessary.
77 -hv-

And sometimes it is necessary to commit unstable individuals, for their own health & safety.

Perfectly constitutonal, but a very dangerous power, best kept under strict libertarian scrutiny.

[artisan001]

"So, you're limiting their liberty."

Me? Libertarians recognize that limit with their initiation of force standard.
It's been there all along- I don't know how you missed it.

"Gunga Diner"

That's one of the drawbacks of liberty.
People can use it to do things that you or I disapprove of.

There is a bar in the Yukon, Skagway, I believe where the special of the house is a shot of whiskey with a pickled human toe in it.
The toe was amputated due to frostbite and they thought that it would be funny to serve it to customers.( as far as I know, the toe does this voluntarily as do the patrons of the bar)

Now if you want to go up there and make them stop doing that, be my guest.
I think that they would just toss you out in the snow. Why? Because their little prank with the pickled toe doesn't hurt anybody else.

There are people who eat human placenta. Should there be laws against that?

The point is that no matter how much you dissaprove of someone's actions, you you can't justifiably impose your will on them unless they are hurting others.

It is not possible to force morality on others without being immoral yourself.