Old Hoosier Apologizes to Libertarians

Thread from yesterday ^ | 3-26 | TOH

[The Old Hoosier]

Yesterday, I got into an argument with some libertarians. I promised to humiliate myself if they could answer the following question:

If I want to sell myself into slavery in order to pay off debts, why should the government be able to prevent me? Why should I not have every right to enter into an indissoluble contract surrendering my freedom--temporarily or permanently--to someone else in exchange for some consideration?

I hereby admit that I was wrong, because ThomasJefferson agreed that the government should have no power to prohibit voluntary slavery--a step that I did not think any of them would want to take. I hereby eat crow. (Tpaine and Eagle Eye still haven't given direct answers, but I'll mention it here when they do, and eat more crow.)

The relevant part of the long argument we had is here. TJ agrees to voluntary slavery at 374.

[ActionNewsBill]

Libertarians would support the legalization of peonage, indentured servitude and some other forms of slavery outlawed by our Thirteenth Amendment.

When will you ever get over your irrational hatred of libertarians?

[Cultural Jihad]

The Ideologue Party would have no issue with people selling their organs or limbs. Furthermore, they would outlaw the discouragement of entering into the slavery of drug addiction. The self-abrogation of inalienable rights is big on their list of so-called 'rights' and they would support any designer drug whose use thwarts free will and successful self-governance. Perhaps the Ideologue Party wants to call slavery to drugs as some sort of 'freedom.' Perhaps it is in an Orwellian sense.

[Roscoe]

I think it was Richard Nixon that said that you can't really hate those you have no respect for.

[Roscoe]

Libertarians would contend that freedom includes the "right" to own slaves, though the operation of peonage or indentured servitude.

Contract über alles.

[Protagoras]

But it's true.

"You can't handle the truth"

And you certainly have no ability to tell it.

[The Old Hoosier]

I think your "owner" would not be able to use the power of the government to enforce the contract due to the Thirteenth Amendment.

Right, I'm aware that the law exists, but I wanted to see a libertarian give reasons why government should have this power. In a sense, I'm very surprised that some libertarians are ok with this. In another sense, I'm not so surprised.

[Roscoe]

"You can't handle the truth"

Irony.

[tpaine]

Good lord man, how can you still be denying that Eagle & I didn't answer your silly questions this morning? Your last post to me on this AM's linked thread is here, with my answer from minutes later. - You said:

Why should the government be able to stop me from entering into any contract I want?
411 posted on 3/26/02 8:36 AM Pacific by The Old Hoosier

To: The Old Hoosier

Because such a contract violates the constitution. - #415 tpaine -

-------------------------

Yet here you are hours later, on a thread to which you didn't even have the courtesy to flag me, pretending as though you didn't scuttle away without reply to that last comment.

You have no honor, sir, or credibility.

[tpaine]

"Tpaine and Eagle Eye still haven't given direct answers, but I'll mention it here when they do, and eat more crow."

I answered directly at # 410 on that thread, and you did not challenge that answer. -- Instead you asked another silly question, which I answered in turn. -- Then you left to post this bit of bull, based on your lie above.

For shame. You should have to eat your own BS, not crow.

[Cultural Jihad]

Shortchanged
Nina Ungureanu, 40, sold her kidney to finish construction on her house in the village of Minjir. Promised $3,000 for the organ, she received only $2,000. And although she says she's healthy, she's concerned about the postsurgery dizzy spells she now experiences when she works outside. Nonetheless, Ungureanu has many people coming to her home to ask her how they, too, can sell their body parts.

All with the imprimatur of the Libertarian Party, whose motto is: "So what? Who cares? Too bad!"
Source: http://www.msnbc.com/news/603127.asp

[tpaine]

I would consider any contract entered into by sane consenting adults to be morally binding. I think a good case could be made however, questioning the sanity of an individual who would surrender their life and their perpetual labor for $50,000.

A contract to commit an unconstitutional act, one that violates an inalienable right, is neither 'morally' nor legally binding.

And I doubt anyone can put a price on an insane act, or call two such 'consenting' adults altogether sane. -- Thus, their 'contract' would be void, as per catch 22.

[Khepera]

Too bad the Libertarians choose to worship Thomas Jefferson instead of God. Thomas Jefferson is irrelevant. It is God who holds the answer to all our problems.

[tpaine]

Whattan absolute goofball you are CJ. -- Thanks.

[Kerberos]

"If I want to sell myself into slavery in order to pay off debts, why should the government be able to prevent me? Why should I not have every right to enter into an indissoluble contract surrendering my freedom--temporarily or permanently--to someone else in exchange for some consideration?"

You alread do that everyday. It's called a job.

[tpaine]

Libertarians could be said to 'worship' & respect the reason inherent in the minds of most men.

To bad your God seemed to skip over you and CJ in that department.

[Khepera]

At least my God lives.... Yours is dead!

[Khepera]

You are always quoting the Constitution but you keep forgetting that our rights are given by God and not Thomas Jefferson. Says so right in the Constitution. Not that matters because its the Bible you should be reading and quoting.

[Brad’s Gramma]

My God lives, too!!!!!!!!! :-) :-) :-)

[tpaine]

Reason is dead? -- In your mind, granted.

[tpaine]

Whatever. -- Please, be Christian, - thump your bible elsewhere.