Just as you have the freedom to follow and practice any religion, shouldn't others also be guaranteed the freedom FROM your religious practices and laws? If you agree that no one should be enforced to abide by the personal beliefs of others, then surely you DO believe in the freedom from religion just as much as the freedom of religion, right..?
Secondly, if you think there's a private way of doing public programs better, then you've already completely misunderstood the entire point of public programs. Public programs are meant to provide for the public, whereas any private system is meant to make a profit, and these two things are diametrically opposed. A public program is meant to provide access for all people, regardless of wealth, ability, intention, etc...whereas a private system provides for those who can afford their private services. Free public transportation will always be a superior system to private for-profit transit, free public healthcare will always be a superior system to private for-profit healthcare, free public housing will always be a superior system to private for-profit landlording, etc. Publicly-owned and accountable systems will always be superior to privately-owned and unaccountable ones, because the goal is accessibility and provision for all of the public. If your primary goal is simply to make profit, then private systems excel at that, yes...but again, that is a blatantly anti-democratic and anti-public means of organizing society.
@TruthHurts10111mos11MO
I hate government and would sooner abolish it than implement a single. one of your mindless programs
@VulcanMan6 11mos11MO
That sounds to me like a pretty good way of saying "I have no real rebuttal against it, I just don't like it because I hate the idea of a healthy society that provides for each other."
Also, do you actually mean "the government" or "the state"..? Because those are two different concepts. A government is merely whatever organized means a society uses to make decisions, so if you're anti-government, then how do you believe societal decisions should be made? Violent free for all?
@TruthHurts10111mos11MO
No, I believe the government should defend our rights, which means stopping crimes, but do nothing more, because more than that is a crime.
@VulcanMan6 11mos11MO
So you're not actually "anti-state", because clearly you still believe it should exist to uphold military/police presence, uphold laws and legal contracts, likely some form of a court or judiciary system to enforce them, etc...right? So like I suggested in another reply, you're not actually "anti-state", you're just some form of a Libertarian-Capitalist. You still want a state to exist, you would just disagree with others over the extents of what they should have/do, but you're not ideologically nor fundamentally "anti-state".
Also, things that… Read more
@TruthHurts10111mos11MO
"Crimes" are actually defined by God in the Bible, and I believe in the Rule of Higher Law, not the Rule of Government Law. Therefore crimes against God can be committed by both government and individuals, and both must be punished. The government should only exist as an enforcement arm for the Laws of God but do nothing else, which means away with 99 percent of it