[#3Fan]

It is important to recognize however, that Christ's actions in the temple were morally justifiable, (even under libertarian philosophy) because Christ was presumably acting in defense of his own rights (inasmuch as those who traded there, defiled HIS house, without HIS permission, hence violating his property rights)

If it's OK for Christ to initiate force to protect his rights on his earth, then it's OK for us to initiate force to protect our children in our country against those that would do harm or facilitate harm.

Force may morally be employed in defense of rights. It may not be morally initiated (even against sinners) if rights have NOT been violated.

Those who sell hard drugs violate rights in the same manner the moneychangers violated rights in the temple.

Is that a clear explanation?

Yes, I'm glad you agree that a people has a right to protect themselves from activities that could lead to destruction.

[OWK]

If it's OK for Christ to initiate force to protect his rights on his earth....

Once again, words have meanings... please pay careful attention here.

Christs actions in the temple were NOT an intiation of force.

His actions were an employment of defensive force, in response to force initiated by those choosing to be in the temple (on his property), against his (the property owner's) will.

Please pay careful attention to the words.

They have a very precise and important meaning.