Actually I never have. And when did copying intellectual property become a crime for a libertarian? I know there is a debate on whether or not this is stealing or not, but that’s not the question is it? You’ve decided it is stealing. But if it isn’t stealing and you do it, then it wouldn’t be stealing.
What does lying to a cop have to do with natural rights? Are you trying to say something you are not fully sharing here?
You advocate it. So either stick with your advocations or find a better way. It may appear that it is psychologizing and emotional tirades, but you’re going on about how destroying property and stealing are good - so - deductively moral nihilist are on the slippery slope due to lack of practical wisdom on whether murdering is good or bad. Not my fault you’re that way.
Huh?
I’m not advocating for criminals. You are. Either stick with your advocations or find a better way to relate to others.
Not you… majevska. If that makes more sense.
My point is that some people do think this is stealing. I do not, but there are those that do, and would say it is stealing. And since you say stealing is always wrong, you must think that copying a cd is immoral.
I am saying there is nothing necessarily immoral about lying to a cop asking you questions that he should not be asking. However, you seem to think there is nothing immoral about lying whatsoever! Apparently, you think if someone signs a contract, but has no intent of keeping it, that there was nothing immoral about it, since lying is never immoral, it is just a “vice”.
No. I mean stealing defined according to natural law. I’m not talking about any arbitrary laws that any nut-job can come along and declare.
I don’t know. It’s not a natural rights issue, as I pointed out, which is what I was originally referring to. You brought up lying. I didn’t. So I don’t see what this has to do with the original comment about stealing and natural rights.
Let me use a different example. If someone is given a government monopoly, is it immoral to steal from that person?
Can you give me some reference to what you require, force wise, in order to have society and I will talk to you about it…
The logical deduction against fascism is morality, it has to do with violating property rights…
Fair enough…
How is the right to say whatever one wants to not a natural rights issue?
I doubt you actually practice moral nihilism. When was the last time you raped someone? There’s lost of satisfaction to be gained from that, I’m sure, and a moral nihilist would have no moral qualms with the act.
I think wilderness means it is not a natural rights issue for the “recipient” of a lie, which he is correct, freedom of speech is just that, free, whether or not you choose to believe it, act on it and find the speech to be false is irrelevant as to a natural rights issue…
I appriciate the tag-in to the debate, but he apparently does claim to be a moral nihilist.
What exactly do you say to someone like that?
How would that stealing take place? What’s the context? If you mean by copying dvd’s and the government currently says, “That’s against the law.” I say it’s immoral for the government to back up their arbitrary morality with coercion. It doesn’t meet the liberty standard, which provides equal potential flourishing for each individual (it is not arbitrary). Now I could go ahead and copy the dvd and if I get caught I’ll probably have to pay a fine. It’s the difference between a libertarian society and a coercive society that fringes innocent human action to decisions of brute force. The free market and civil society knows better.
I mean, let’s say a musician or owner of a power company made a lot of money because they were given a monopoly. Is it immoral to then break into their homes and steal from them?
Umm Yes… The government that created the monopoly, not so much…
And I am just saying that one should not necessarily be punished for lying. Like defamation laws. We should get rid of those.
Ok. It depends who’s property you are on. So I left that hanging. If somebody was in my house talking about women in a arbitrary perverted manner (arbitrary meaning I’m defining what is perverted and what is not), then I would ask them to leave. I think it’s a vice to be around people that talk that way. It’s distasteful, especially considering it’s my house, I have a two year old son, and my wife is here. Does this mean the guest can go and get the law? No. It’s my property and I didn’t initiate any physical coercion upon his life (person).
You lying to a cop, I don’t see how that fits into natural rights. You lied. Ok. And? Do you see what I’m saying?
I admittedly get annoyed. Having no practical wisdom they are destined to die in the hands of somebody conducting self-defense as they hedonistically run through the streets pillaging. I guess my annoyance is due to I care. I care about them. I care about the people they would rape, steal, or murder in seeing no wrong in such acts. I care more about the innocents and feel empathy for the deranged moral nihilists.
I think your post was good. So not much more can be said. You were spot on.
I guess not much can be said other than social justice (tar and feather their reputation). But that’s a choice I’ve made and social justice isn’t always the path to take, but I’m disguised by these people at the moment.
The thing is, you do not believe lying is immoral. I don’t either. I do not believe in morality. So I do not think we have a dispute here.