Originally posted by Chrawnus
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Impending Minimum Wage hike causing restaurants to close
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Paprika View PostI haven't disputed that according to some of man's scribblings on papers you 'own' stuff.
I think you're almost as much fun as Mickiel, but slightly more lucid.
And I want to get into that.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paprika View PostWe are agreed that it is possible that the basic ownership relation of some things is communal. So let's consider a certain sum of money, that by a modern view of ownership belongs to an individual. However, if its basic ownership relation is communal, then it certainly does not belong to him alone, no matter what he thinks. If it is the case that such possibility exists, it opens up the possibility that redistribution can be moral.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paprika View PostBut you know that all things belong to God.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paprika View PostI do not see how this is the case.
Originally posted by Paprika View PostChange doesn't necessarily have to be a wholesale overnight rewriting of all the laws.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostIf it's basic ownership relation is communal is the main issue here it seems to me. I agreed with you that some ownership can legitimately be seen as communal. Do you have any specific arguments to the effect that money should be seen in this way?
Do you have any specific arguments to the effect that money should be seen in this way?
I can see the logic in for example the farms and roads of a village or city being communally owned.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostI do not see how anything that I wrote in the post you replied to that would lead you to conclude that I think anything to the effect that change would necessarily have to be "a wholesale overnight rewriting of all the laws". That is why I see the above quote as irrelevant to the post to which it was a reply.
Comment
-
Let me ask a question. I think we can all agree in this thread that the world and everything in it belongs to God. Now, if God said that the land is yours, would this not mean that the land is actually yours?"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ― C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock: Essays on Theology (Making of Modern Theology)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Jesse View PostLet me ask a question. I think we can all agree in this thread that the world and everything in it belongs to God. Now, if God said that the land is yours, would this not mean that the land is actually yours?
The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Paprika View PostYou made much about people probably protesting if such a conceptual change of legal ownership was made against their wishes. Given that I have not argued that change has to be forced in such a sudden manner, it is worth pointing out (imo) that not all change has to be of the sort you were talking about.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Jesse View PostLet me ask a question. I think we can all agree in this thread that the world and everything in it belongs to God. Now, if God said that the land is yours, would this not mean that the land is actually yours?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chrawnus View PostDepends on whether he meant it in the biblical and collectivistic sense of the term, or if he was using it in the modern and frankly misguided sense.
The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
|
16 responses
155 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by One Bad Pig
Today, 11:55 AM
|
||
Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
|
53 responses
399 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
Today, 11:32 AM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
|
25 responses
114 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 08:36 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
|
33 responses
198 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Roy
Today, 07:43 AM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
|
84 responses
373 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by JimL
Today, 11:08 AM
|
Comment