cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/54506028
cross-posted from: https://quokk.au/c/politics/p/1270828/iowa-dem-josh-turek-releases-anti-trans-ad-calling-for-a-federal-funding-ban-on-trans-care
On Saturday, Oct. 24, Josh Turek, the Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate in Iowa, released a new ad targeting transgender people—perhaps the worst anti-transgender ad of the entire election cycle to come from a Democrat. The ad begins with Turek talking about his disability and the importance of not discriminating, before immediately turning to adopt discriminatory policies toward transgender people. One such policy is a sports ban, a position sadly becoming increasingly common among high-profile Democrats in competitive races, and one that alone would have made this yet another newsworthy anti-trans ad. But Turek then goes further, advocating for a new policy: a proposal to ban federally funded gender-affirming care in the United States, one that would impact a substantial number of transgender people and make their care difficult to impossible to receive.
Sounds like pretty typical AnCap ideas - am I off base on that?
I’m more concerned with you imposing your opinions on others. If you live in town A, and I live in town B, and everyone in my town agrees to elect someone to work out what crops we plant, would you come over and disrupt my town?
The point here would be freedom, and what freedom logically means is that I cannot initiate actions - initiate is the key word here - that violate your will, and neither can you to me.
If you and 50 people got together and all consented to a village of debauchery, drugs, prostitution, and drunk driving, so long as you all consented, I would allow you to live that lifestyle without interruption.
I might try to convince you that there are better ways to live your life, but I wouldn’t use force against you to get you to stop.
But don’t forget that this only applies because there’s consent. If some of you enter our town where we do not agree to you doing drugs on my land or in my store, or driving drunk on the roads that our community all agreed to share ownership over, then we are justified if we not only ask you to stop or ask you to leave, but if we use violence against you to get to you if you refuse.
So to specifically answer your question, if you want to live the way you’ve described, you would absolutely be allowed to - by us, anyway.
In fact, we could even become allies whereas we agree to defend one another if another group were to come and try to use violence to force us into their ways.
The disconnect so many others face is only about freedom and nothing more. There is no such thing as a man so wise that he can make choices for other adults without their consent. Nobody knows better for me than I do and nobody knows better for my children than I do as their father (except an equal share, their mother.)
Even if you think you do, you don’t. Opinions aren’t facts, they’re opinions. Even if you THINK you have a better way of living, you don’t. The only time when you’re objectively wrong is when you’re utilizing violence for a victimless crime. Violence - legitimate, moral violence - is only for defense against things like murder, rape, theft, assault, and fraud.
When other people don’t get this it’s because psychologically they’re thinking at low levels. Low level thinking tends to be very isolated to the “me”. The higher up you go the more you begin thinking that others have wants and needs just like you do, and that your wants and needs may conflict with theirs. Many people today still think in terms of, “I want this and therefore so must you, so if you are protesting, you must be wrong, or sinister”. They cannot understand that someone else might have a want that differs from theirs, and that they aren’t wrong for having it.
I would argue that there are two forms of morals - subjective and objective. Objective morals are surrounded by the NAP while subjective morals are things like, “I don’t think you should smoke cigarettes because they could reduce your lifespan and that would cause pain to others around you, plus place additional burden on those providing healthcare and insurance.”
There’s no such thing as objective value, not even for human life, so to say your life holds value and thus, you shouldn’t smoke is just an opinion.
Can I consent to being your slave?
No that wouldn’t be possible. A slave is someone who is, for all intents and purposes, property of another against their will. If you consent to it, it wouldn’t be slavery.
It’s like theft. If you consent to give it to me I’m not stealing from you. In such an instance, you’re selling it to me, trading it to me, gifting it to me, or maybe just giving it to me as a gift. What manifests theft as theft from a fundamental idea of the essence of the idea itself is that I would need to be violating your consent - your will, as it were.
Theft is only theft when you violate will. Rape is only sex if everyone partaking consents. Even murder no longer becomes murder if there’s consent. In fact, you can kill someone who didn’t consent to dying and it still wouldn’t always be murder because the person may have consented to a risk that just so happened to end their life. Take for example if you consent to go skydiving and you fall to your death. The skydiving company didn’t murder you because you agreed to the risks of the situation that lead to your death.
Now had someone pushed you out of the airplane before you put your parachute on - which wasn’t something you agreed to have happen - then the person who pushed you out of the plane would have murdered you.
Slavery is the same thing. You’re not a slave if you’re OK with it. Now if you consented to be someone else’s property and you also consented for you to never be able to change your mind about it, well you’re an idiot. That’d be like agreeing to give your house away to someone and then being upset when you change your mind and ask for it back and they tell you no. You would never do that, so why would your own autonomy be any different?
Fuck, that’s some dumb shit to read. It’s like a child writing a fantasy world.
You have no idea on how anything works in general. Are you a teenager?