Originally posted by Philosophickus Rex

They take the property (my money) which was taken from me without my consent and use it fight wars that I don't approve of.

And they take my money to do activities I don't approve of. Such as abortions, but they also take my money for things I use daily, such as police, courts, roads, public works projects, etc.

Well, I think the best thing for us to do would be to keep our troops at home. I can think of reasonable situations for sending the military overseas, but I haven't come across one for a long time.

Did you know that when Saddam's sons when to college, they would find women they thought were pretty, kidnap them, rape them, and sometimes murder them and their father let them get away with it? Tens of thousands of people disappeared without a trace during Saddam's era. One scene I'll never forget reading about is a man who went to a mass grave to search for his daughter that disappeared 15 years ago and was last seen with Saddam's thugs. It's reading and hearing about things like this that make me wonder why on earth we didn't finish the job in the 1990's instead of waiting till 2003.

Originally posted by Philosophickus Rex

They take the property (my money) which was taken from me without my consent and use it fight wars that I don't approve of.

You gave indirect consent by electing a representative. The only way to withdraw this indirect consent is to remove yourself from the representative government.

Sorry, Phil--that's the breaks of living in a republic.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

And they take my money to do activities I don't approve of. Such as abortions, but they also take my money for things I use daily, such as police, courts, roads, public works projects, etc.

Are you saying it makes it right? I don't quite understand what you are saying. I know those things are the case, but it doesn't make them any less immoral.

Did you know that when Saddam's sons when to college, they would find women they thought were pretty, kidnap them, rape them, and sometimes murder them and their father let them get away with it? Tens of thousands of people disappeared without a trace during Saddam's era. One scene I'll never forget reading about is a man who went to a mass grave to search for his daughter that disappeared 15 years ago and was last seen with Saddam's thugs. It's reading and hearing about things like this that make me wonder why on earth we didn't finish the job in the 1990's instead of waiting till 2003.

That's very sad. I don't wish Hussein on anyone. I also don't wish America on any baby.

Originally posted by technomage

You gave indirect consent by electing a representative. The only way to withdraw this indirect consent is to remove yourself from the representative government.

Sorry, Phil--that's the breaks of living in a republic.

I never consented to anything. They take my property and I never told them they could. That's theft, whether this is a republic or a monarchy.

Originally posted by Philosophickus Rex

I never consented to anything. They take my property and I never told them they could. That's theft, whether this is a republic or a monarchy.

Excuse me, but explicit consent is not necessary. That's government, whether we like or dislike it.

Originally posted by Philosophickus Rex

Are you saying it makes it right? I don't quite understand what you are saying. I know those things are the case, but it doesn't make them any less immoral.

I asked what was immoral about this war, not about taxes. Now what is immoral about it?

That's very sad. I don't wish Hussein on anyone. I also don't wish America on any baby.

Most of the problems over there are not due to Americans, but other people causing problems.

I never consented to anything. They take my property and I never told them they could. That's theft, whether this is a republic or a monarchy.

Did you drive to work on a road today? Have you ever had to call the police for anything? Ever needed a contract enforced? Those are all services that are provided by the government, unless you can seriously say you never use these services, what are you complaining about?

Originally posted by technomage

Excuse me, but explicit consent is not necessary. That's government, whether we like or dislike it.

You're excused, but what do you mean by not necessary? Not necessary for what? Of course they can take my property without my consent; they have bigger guns than I do. Doesn't make it right.

And I will not make this about my likes or dislikes, even though I happen to dislike theft.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

I asked what was immoral about this war, not about taxes. Now what is immoral about it?

Wars are paid for in two ways- taxation and inflation. One is immoral, the latter might be immoral.

Most of the problems over there are not due to Americans, but other people causing problems.

I think that's what most people probably think. I won't blame 9/11 on Bush or America, but we certainly have done our part to muck up the middle east.

Did you drive to work on a road today? Have you ever had to call the police for anything? Ever needed a contract enforced? Those are all services that are provided by the government, unless you can seriously say you never use these services, what are you complaining about?

I have no choice but to pay the govt. for those services. I'd rather the free market pay for them, but the govt. generally doesn't allow it. I'm not complaining about the roads (that they exist), I'm complaining about the way in which they were paved.

Originally posted by Philosophickus Rex

You're excused, but what do you mean by not necessary? Not necessary for what? Of course they can take my property without my consent; they have bigger guns than I do. Doesn't make it right.

Actually, yes--it is right. Or at least, it is legal and customary.

When you live under a government as a minor (as you know), you cannot exercise all of the rights of a citizen. When you reach your majority, and gain access to those rights, you also assume the attendant responsibilities. You need not even ever exercise those rights: upon reaching your majority, staying in the country implies consent to living under the laws of that country.

And I will not make this about my likes or dislikes, even though I happen to dislike theft.

Phil, my friend, likes and dislikes are the only grounds for objection--and while you may find it to be sufficient grounds, likes and dislikes do not make for a legal basis.

Originally posted by Philosophickus Rex

Wars are paid for in two ways- taxation and inflation. One is immoral, the latter might be immoral.

So was WWII immoral?

I think that's what most people probably think. I won't blame 9/11 on Bush or America, but we certainly have done our part to muck up the middle east.

The Middle East has been mucked up for centuries and really the issue is that Americans are a bit nieve thinking we can fix it in a few years.

I have no choice but to pay the govt. for those services. I'd rather the free market pay for them, but the govt. generally doesn't allow it. I'm not complaining about the roads (that they exist), I'm complaining about the way in which they were paved.

Free markets can make things more expensive as well, plus you have issues of people trying to buy up all these places so that they can pretty much 'run the town' (so to speak). As for the roads, well the issue I find there is that some city governments don't seem to keep up on the maintenance very well (if at all). Also, have you ever used or needed government services? I've used them several times this year and today. Roads are just one example of this.

Originally posted by Philosophickus Rex

They take the property (my money) which was taken from me without my consent and use it fight wars that I don't approve of.
.

If you feel strongly this way, I suggest consulting the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee.

Rando, I hate to tell you this--but tax resistance (even "by issue" tax resistance) violates Matt 22:21.

Originally posted by technomage

Actually, yes--it is right. Or at least, it is legal and customary.

Ok the, put me on record for saying that legality does not equal moral rightness.

When you live under a government as a minor (as you know), you cannot exercise all of the rights of a citizen. When you reach your majority, and gain access to those rights, you also assume the attendant responsibilities. You need not even ever exercise those rights: upon reaching your majority, staying in the country implies consent to living under the laws of that country.

I agree with you somewhat. I could leave the country. It does not change the fact that I'd rather live here and have the laws changed (or vaporized).

Phil, my friend, likes and dislikes are the only grounds for objection--and while you may find it to be sufficient grounds, likes and dislikes do not make for a legal basis.[/quote]

Mere taste is not the only ground for objection. And I don't care what is legal or illegal in this country as far as it relates to morality. Abortion is legal yet I object on moral grounds.

Originally posted by lilpixieofterror

So was WWII immoral?

Taxation is immoral, yes.

The Middle East has been mucked up for centuries and really the issue is that Americans are a bit nieve thinking we can fix it in a few years.

I think we have gotten ourselves into something that cannot be fixed; at least, messing around with the middle east won't fix it. They should try and fix it themselves.

Free markets can make things more expensive as well,

While this is generally false, I'm fine with paying market value as long as I'm paying voluntarily. Money is not going to buy my conscience.

plus you have issues of people trying to buy up all these places so that they can pretty much 'run the town' (so to speak).

I'm fine with that.

As for the roads, well the issue I find there is that some city governments don't seem to keep up on the maintenance very well (if at all).

Right, and if there was a sufficient need for a road in a free market there would be a service. Central planning does not keep up with a dynamic marketplace. It impedes.

Also, have you ever used or needed government services? I've used them several times this year and today. Roads are just one example of this.

Well, I've needed govt. service before for the sole reason that they have a monopoly on things and generally do not allow for competition. It really is impossible to escape govt. regulation, so I have rarely, if ever, been involved in a free market (save some minor bartering with friends).

Originally posted by Amazing Rando

If you feel strongly this way, I suggest consulting the National War Tax Resistance Coordinating Committee.

Thank you Rando. I've bookmarked it.

Originally posted by Philosophickus Rex

I agree with you somewhat. I could leave the country. It does not change the fact that I'd rather live here and have the laws changed (or vaporized).

Then work to change the laws if you wish. However, as the law stands now, your consent is implied by your continued presence.

Taxation is immoral, yes.

Taxation may or may not be moral, but for Christians it is obligatory--even if the taxes are used for purposes you object to on moral grounds.

Originally posted by technomage

Then work to change the laws if you wish. However, as the law stands now, your consent is implied by your continued presence.

Right, the govt. takes it that I've consented. That's what their law says, so I'm sure they will help themselves to my stuff and lose no sleep over it.

Originally posted by Philosophickus Rex

Taxation is immoral, yes.

So when Jesus said to give to Caesar's what is Caesars and to God what is God's that was immoral? Interesting position you have there.

I think we have gotten ourselves into something that cannot be fixed; at least, messing around with the middle east won't fix it. They should try and fix it themselves.

I really do doubt the middle east is going to fix itself anytime soon. The only reason why people care as much as they do is because of the oil resources over there.

While this is generally false, I'm fine with paying market value as long as I'm paying voluntarily. Money is not going to buy my conscience.

It might not buy yours, but it does a good job buy other people's. A lot of things tend to go rather wrong when you let private business run everything. Thus the reason government stepped in in the first place.

Right, and if there was a sufficient need for a road in a free market there would be a service. Central planning does not keep up with a dynamic marketplace. It impedes.

I really do doubt it would, all that would bring about is the wonderful bidding market and different road standards across the nation. Kind of like the major problems we had with early rail roads in fact it is because abuses of the past by companies that things are the way they are today.

Well, I've needed govt. service before for the sole reason that they have a monopoly on things and generally do not allow for competition. It really is impossible to escape govt. regulation, so I have rarely, if ever, been involved in a free market (save some minor bartering with friends).

These government regs came out because of business screwed customers and employees over. The reason for the FDA is around is because people would make medicine and throw a bunch of crap in it like cocaine into it and sell it as a cure for some disease when all it did was make a nation of drug users and abusers. The problem was so bad that congress passed laws such as making it mandatory for companies to tell you what is in their products, drug testing, etc. It is because of abuses of private industry that the government had to step in. In fact, alot of the laws and government services we have today are because of situations where private business was trying to screw over the consumer, so if you want to blame anybody for all the government regulation, blame big business for immoral practices to begin with.