Posted on 06/08/2005 12:26:29 AM PDT by Liberty Wins
All of the atheistic humanism stems from the french revolution, in my opinion, aided in some measure by our own Thomas Jefferson. I think the french rev also spawned our old buddy marx et. al.
btw, I think tribalism will save Europe and us too. The Arabs think they're mean. Nobody is meaner than we are once we get going.
What judge?? To speak of the "judge" in a state of anarchy is as nonsensical as to speak of the "king" of a republic -- it is an impossibility by definition.
In which case the police are not bound to -- and indeed not permitted to -- enforce his pronouncements.
Agreed, and it seems to be getting worse.
You don't understand anarchy. In anarchy, law is adjudicated by private judges who contract their services to aggrieved parties, and receive service from private enforcers. The difference is absence of the state monopoly on law interpretation and enforcement.
Regarding your second point, it is true that the judge may have a difficulty enforcing the judgements he makes in open defiance of the morally injust law. It really would depend on which level of law enforcement we are talking about -- police is not monolithical. It does not relieve him from the moral responsibility to do just that, nevertheless.
If you're talking about a privately hired arbitrator in an anarcho-capitalist setting, then obviously the party injured by a judgement that was not supported by the previously agreed scope of the arbitrator's authority would simply ignore it.
Your original contention was that a judge who follows his conscience would be soliciting criminal assault, and my subsequent post about anarchy showed that not to be so, even if, indeed, the judge might have problems enforcing his judgement.
Not so. A "judge" who issues a pronouncement outside the scope of his authority with the intent that it be enforced has solicited the lawless use of force, even if the enforcers (quite correctly) ignore the instruction.
Response: Yes.
Not if his judgement is directed against a violation of the moral law.
Irrelevant, as he has no charter to enforce any but the written law.
Your original contention was that a judge who follows his conscience would be soliciting criminal assault, and not that he would have a difficulty enforcing it. He would, indeed, have that difficulty.
I am not sure. Most of European immigrants at the end of XIX century and beginning of XX century were poor peasants from Italy, Poland etc who came to work in factories and mines.
And many of the first settlers in colonial times were the friends of Cromwell. Ayn Rand sucks.
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.