Replies

"Do offensive odors in and of themselves harm another?"

We were discussing "sights". Not "odors". "Sights". Stick with "sights".

"There are a great many things you don't know."

About you? Not in particular, no. That's why I just generalize and call you a hypocrite. Then it covers all of them.

"I also don't know any Libertarians who claim that you have no right to object if your next-door neighbor burns tires in his yard. Do you?"

Again, let's stay on the original topic -- an individual masturbating in public. How would a Libertarian justify his objection to that behavior based on harm to others through force, theft, or fraud?

Odors are very relevant to the discussion, but I understand why you want to pretend otherwise.

How would a Libertarian justify his objection to that behavior based on harm to others through force, theft, or fraud?

We still have only your unsupported word that harm is a Libertarian's only basis for objecting.

Typically paulsen 'forgets' that his question was answered to his satisfaction back at post #90:

Public displays of offensive behaviors are harmful as they lead to breaches of peace.
> Which he agreed to at post #98:

True. Then punish the breach of the peace

Time after time we see paulsen repeat his same old pattern. -- He loses/concedes an argument one day, than re-posts the same argument the next day, -- trollishly ignoring defeat.

He has no shame, no honor. -- As we've seen again at #161:

Sorry, you have not shown how the mere sight of something, offensive as it might be, harms another. And I can't believe that you, of all people, would support laws against offensive behavior when that behavior harms no one and is merely offensive to some "sufficient number" of people.

You really are disturbed paulsen, arguing that public displays of masturbation "-- harms no one and is merely offensive to some "sufficient number" of people. --"

Good grief man, you would abandon all sense of decency in order to 'win' a argument?

Again, let's stay on the original topic -- an individual masturbating in public. How would a Libertarian justify his objection to that behavior based on harm to others through force, theft, or fraud?

Sigh - Again paulsen; --- Public displays of offensive behaviors are harmful as they lead to breaches of peace.

Are you really this obsessed? Can't you 'remember' that you agreed with this answer at #98?