Silly. Black market decreases quality, accountability, and increases unnecessary violence; e.g., the 1920’s and 30’s bootleggers which gave us Al Capone. The answer is capitalism with its abolition of force, and its political principle of individual rights.
Society is nothing but individuals. Any society that doesn’t respect the sovereignty of each and every individual soul that are its members is no longer a society. Indeed, it becomes nothing more than a barbarian horde.
Religion is nothing more than a psychological deluision—a belief in a hereafter combined with a mystical worship of the non-existent. Or as Lenin said: “The opiate of the masses” If the human soul really desires to reach the best within itself, it needs to reject faith and mysticism, and accept reason as it’s guiding light.
I don’t personally believe it should have any control. The people *should* control the government. The government shouldn’t control people.
Are you ready to end the War on Poverity along with the war on drugs.? End all federal welfare programs first If dopers are free to shoot up they should be free to starve and freeze under a bridge somewhere too
Money, i.e., capitalism, is not the problem, government interference in the market. Prohibit the government from having a anything to do with the market and corruption disappears. It’s not the lust for money that corrupts, it’s the lust for power.
Delusional, but not suprisingly so. The biggest lie do-gooders tell is the one they tell themselves—it’s for the good of all.
I would support legalisation without regulation, but that's not on the cards. Definitely not in Australia. We have $900/lb tax on tobacco, $40 packs, plain packaging, they shut down my local cigar store because they weren't allowed to show the customers the cigar before they buy it, thereby bankrupting them. I just want cheap, deregulated drugs. I rather enjoy them. It's a lot easier to get cannister than illicit tobacco. I'll take my chances with prohibition.
It’s a surrender to cynicism. In order to fight for the principle of liberty, you need to use rational arguments to enlighten your fellow citizens to benefits of liberty and the horrors of tryanny. In essence, you need to win their minds by appealing to their reason.
I am definitely in favor of stricter gun control, though only if done nationwide and only if done strictly enough. It doesn't help a lot when criminals can so easily bypass the laws.
I have never met a homeless person (I volunteer with my fraternity and pass out blankets to them) that would agree with your nonsense statement that they have chosen homelessness.
They most certainly have. No one stays homeless that doesn’t want to be homeless. I’m well aware of it, I was homeless.
I'm taken aback by your JFK quote. In what way did he mean that? In other words what was the context? BTW: Based on my knowledge, Hitler's only significance is in understanding the nature of evil, the lhorror of self-sacrifice for the common good, the destructiveness of putting anything above your own existence, the evil of Immanuel Kant, and how even the most insignificant soul ever born can change the course of history-Immanuel Kant is the intellectual father of Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, etc, and therefore is far more significant in human history, and much more dangerous. Ayn Rand--It is your mind that they want you to surrender—all those who preach the creed of sacrifice, whatever their tags or their motives, whether they demand it for the sake of your soul or of your body, whether they promise you another life in heaven or a full stomach on this earth. Those who start by saying: “It is selfish to pursue your own wishes, you must sacrifice them to the wishes of others”—end up by saying: “It is selfish to uphold your convictions, you must sacrifice them to the convictions of others.”--http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/altruism.html Leonard Peikoff--If a man believes that the good is intrinsic in certain actions, he will not hesitate to force others to perform them. If he believes that the human benefit or injury caused by such actions is of no significance, he will regard a sea of blood as of no significance. If he believes that the beneficiaries of such actions are irrelevant (or interchangeable), he will regard wholesale slaughter as his moral duty in the service of a “higher” good. It is the intrinsic theory of values that produces a Robespierre, a Lenin, a Stalin, or a Hitler. It is not an accident that Eichmann was a Kantian.--http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/intrinsic_theory_of_values.html and if I may add, a Durandal.
Then don't read. As to your quote, depends on how you define "right or wrong" --evil is never justified, the moral is always the reasonable.