Libertarians and the Age of Consent

Please note I do not call 'right wing reactionaries" as 'libertarian" . But as they address themselves as such I wish this video to reach them. This video concerns the "age of consent" the content is offensive and disgusting for the conclusions it draws. But it's importance as a tool to highlight the inevitable consequences of applying metaphysical ideals to the real world. I accept that those who share the ideological views of the publishers of this report might not share it's conclusions but feel for the greater good the necessity of the "public" to hear them link to the pdf http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/polin/polin010.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_More


Max More's attempt of an explanation written in 2011 with the article attached. He refuses to apologize for the article even though he says he "regrets" some of it
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/persp/persp026.htm

His credibility is even more stretched by his choice of occupation. He is the President and CEO of a Cryogenics company. Yes he makes money by plying the snake oil claim that people can be reanimated in the future. He sells the idea of living forever, for a very large fee of course. The companies details are here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcor_Life_Extension_Foundation

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Libertarianism
• Libertarianism (metaphysics)
• Metaphysics
• koch
• santelli
• Peter
• Schiff
• Sarah
• Palin
• gold
• warren
• buffett
• jim
• rogers
• marc
• faber
• nouriel
• roubini
• paul
• krugman
• Robert
• Kiyosaki
• economy
• FDR
• gerald
• celente
• austrian
• economics
• mises
• rothbard
• keynes
• friedman
• keynesian
• monetarist
• soros
• tax
• taxes
• sales
• value-added
• inflation
• default
• money
• recession
• hyper-inflation
• rachel
• maddow
• debt
• crisis
• currency
• dollar
• fox
• news
• glenn
• beck
• roosevelt
• franklin
• sean
• hannity
• rush
• limbaugh
• neil
• boortz

[MrZentuga]

Dude.....you didn't read your own links?

I think the author explains himself pretty well in his later comment.

Your ad hominem and blanket attacks dont favour your point either.

Consent and Age of consent are topics worth thinking about.

[franks2732]

@MrZentuga Yes I most certainly did and I do not think his explanations hold weight, in reality I do not think the man himself holds any weight. I value both his lame explanation against his actual career and intellectual endeavors of the last 20 years. He is a fraud who sells "life after death' to fools who are conned out of their hard earned money. He runs a cryogenics business And the essay that he used to defend his early writing was given a forward by Hoppe, a fascist.

[MrZentuga]

@franks2732

As to the man himself, or the writer of the foreword, I'll not comment as I do not know enough to.

But for the sake of argument let's say he's a bad man and he kicks puppies and all that;

Does that invalidate his argument?

You cant really judge a guy for what he said at 18, 30 years later.

Age of consent is arbitrary, as demonstraded by the fact that lots of countries have different ones.

And finally, that freedom of speech is a big deal.

Being a dick doesnt make him always wrong.

[franks2732]

@MrZentuga Yes it does add weight to invalidating his argument when placed alongside it. It adds weight to rejecting his argument. Should I not also value the man making the claims? Hitler said x y and z, sorry to say because Hitler said it I am less likely to be convinced. I can judge a guy on his past behavior and I judge him on his explanations and what he is doing as a career etc now. Being a dick does not make him wrong, but it adds weight. tbc

[franks2732]

@MrZentuga I reject his essay and later retraction for what he said. The weight I placed on my rejection included both his argument and his person. I do judge a man by his 'strength of character' thankfully in general so say all

[sewbuttns]

Deep down underneath all their talk about freedom lies a wish to take advantage of those weaker than them without fear of being punished. This is proof of it for anyone who wasn't already convinced.

[franks2732]

@sewbuttns Yep

[franks2732]

@1776isbeingerased would you like me to go on? I have lots of stuff about Thomas, but his stuff about taxation and private property being theft of the natural rights of man. Lovely chap, I can argue Paine with you imbeciles all day. In fact I have 3 of his books on audio, in print and file. Bring it on buddy. I have actually Read the guys work! LOTS of It

[franks2732]

@1776isbeingerased "In advocating the case of the persons thus dispossessed, it is a right, and not a charity ... (Government must) create a national fund, out of which there shall be paid to every person, when arrived at the age of twenty-one years, the sum of fifteen pounds sterling, as a compensation in part, for the loss of his or her natural inheritance, by the introduction of the system of landed property." T Paine Yes sorry buddy I really do know about Thomas

[franks2732]

@1776isbeingerased Thomas Paine, you do know about Thomas don't you? I mean you really have read his stuff like advocating for pensions, taxation, land tax, his arguments against private property? Is that the guy you are talking about? The same guy who helped fashion "French democracy"? Who work's in relationship to equality of all people adorn the French parliament? That guy, the guy who said 'rich people' should fund via taxation helping poor people. Yes most of us socialists love Thomas LMFAO