View Poll Results: Is it any of the governments business what consenting adults do with each other?

Voters
59. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    8 13.56%
  • No

    51 86.44%
Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112
Results 111 to 116 of 116

Thread: Whos business is it?

  1. #111
    Guru
    nonpareil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    07-04-15 @ 10:36 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,108

    Re: Whos business is it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Panache View Post
    Well, anyone who would take "A difference in information will be present in any transaction" to mean outright lies clearly just doesn't have a mastery of the English language.
    Because you are the Arbiter of the English Language and can say what constitute a mastery of the language?

    If I promise you a working unicycle in exchange for $30, I am obligated to give you a working unicycle if I take your money. If promise you a working unicycle in exchange for $30, but give you an empty box that claims to contain a unicycle instead, that is fraud.
    Why are you "obligated"? As you said: "Those who enter into such agreements need to realize that this is a risk, and take that into account when the agree to it." If you enter into a transaction to buy a bicycle and pay before you have the bicycle in your hands, and turns out it's an empty box, well, you're an adult, you took the risk to pay before the see the bicycle and that it's working properly yourself. That's what my dad always say. He would never pay before he has made sure he's going to get what he paid for, and making all sort of backups to make sure that people don't cheat him because he doesn't trust anyone. He gets that way because he lived in a war torn country where there was no law (i.e. government) to resort to. Fraud is to be expected, not something out of the ordinary. To his way of thinking, people are always out to get as much as they can get, as they should be, so you have to look after your own interest. Anyone who doesn't are fools. He's a pure capitalist as a result of his experiences.


    And Who/what should make you fulfill your "obligation"?

    I am not obligated to tell you that my competitor across the street is selling the exact same model for $15. That is a difference in information, and is ostensibly not fraud. I don't know why this distinction should be unclear to anyone.
    Maybe you didn't read clearly, I said: "Taken to its extreme conclusion".

    "A difference in information... [that] will lead to one party having an advantage over the other" is vague and broad. You might have that distinction in your mind, but I don't read your mind, so I don't know where you want to subjectively draw the line. You have problems with fraud, but others don't, and for those, "free market principles" include allowing people to be defrauded if they are stupid enough to be taken in.


    If consenting adults choose to take risks, they should be allowed to take risks. Its no one's damn business.

    Tell that to the women who got AIDs from their unfaithful husbands.
    Last edited by nonpareil; 01-30-10 at 02:05 AM.

  2. #112
    Irrelevant Pissant

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Last Seen
    03-13-14 @ 07:55 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,194

    Re: Whos business is it?

    Because you are the Arbiter of the English Language and can say what constitute a mastery of the language?
    I suppose I am. For example, I suppose to some, "I'm not interested, please stop calling" could be taken to mean "I would love to purchase some vinyl siding from you, but I just need more convincing, why don't you call me tomorrow around dinnertime?"

    In my arbitration, I have arbitrarily decided that these people have not yet mastered the English language.

    Why are you "obligated"? As you said: "Those who enter into such agreements need to realize that this is a risk, and take that into account when the agree to it." If you enter into a transaction to buy a bicycle and pay before you have the bicycle in your hands, and turns out it's an empty box, well, you're an adult, you took the risk to pay before the see the bicycle and that it's working properly yourself.
    Because that is the whole point of consenting adults voluntarily entering into an agreement. If I consent to give someone $30 in exchange for a unicycle, they need to give me their unicycle in exchange for my $30. If they take my money without giving me the unicycle, it becomes an issue of non-consent.

    Fraud is to be expected, not something out of the ordinary. To his way of thinking, people are always out to get as much as they can get, as they should be, so you have to look after your own interest. Anyone who doesn't are fools. He's a pure capitalist as a result of his experiences.
    Well, be that as it may, deliberately defaulting on promises made as part of a transaction is fraud. Not giving someone every piece of information that could possibly be useful to them is not.

    And Who/what should make you fulfill your "obligation"?
    As soon as it becomes an issue of non-consent, it should be a matter of law, and not before.

    Maybe you didn't read clearly, I said: "Taken to its extreme conclusion".

    "A difference in information... [that] will lead to one party having an advantage over the other" is vague and broad. You might have that distinction in your mind, but I don't read your mind, so I don't know where you want to subjectively draw the line. You have problems with fraud, but others don't, and for those, "free market principles" include allowing people to be defrauded if they are stupid enough to be taken in.
    I don't think it is necessary to read my mind. I have been quite clear about the distinction I am making, which is consent vs non-consent.

    As long as both parties follow the contractual obligations they consented to to the letter, its none of the governments business. If one person tries to keep someone's capital/labour/other value without fulfilling their own obligation, that is fraud.

    It doesn't seem like a terribly subjective line to me.

    Tell that to the women who got AIDs from their unfaithful husbands.
    That was a risk she chose to take. Its none of the government's business.

  3. #113
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    virginia
    Last Seen
    04-01-13 @ 03:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    16,881
    Blog Entries
    19

    Re: Whos business is it?

    I am a firm believer in the right to privacy when it comes to the exchange of precious body fluids.

    I will make one exception though, pedofilia

  4. #114
    Human 2.0
    Maximus Zeebra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Western Europe
    Last Seen
    09-07-17 @ 10:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,568

    Re: Whos business is it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Panache View Post
    If two consenting adult males voluntarily agree to exchange fluids, is it any of the governments business?
    No..

    ....But public order is.. Homo parades is not necessary, nor is homosexuality in public(its anti-educational).
    Homosexual marriage is the business of the church, and homosexual recognition under law is the business of the people residing in the state.
    Europe is illegally occupied by the US

  5. #115
    Guru
    nonpareil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    07-04-15 @ 10:36 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,108

    Re: Whos business is it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Panache View Post
    I suppose I am. For example, I suppose to some, "I'm not interested, please stop calling" could be taken to mean "I would love to purchase some vinyl siding from you, but I just need more convincing, why don't you call me tomorrow around dinnertime?"

    In my arbitration, I have arbitrarily decided that these people have not yet mastered the English language.
    You are a victim of conceit.


    Because that is the whole point of consenting adults voluntarily entering into an agreement. If I consent to give someone $30 in exchange for a unicycle, they need to give me their unicycle in exchange for my $30. If they take my money without giving me the unicycle, it becomes an issue of non-consent.
    Nobody forces you to give the money without first making sure that you will get what you paid for. That's the risk you took when you paid the money first. You consented to give over the money before you received the goods.


    Well, be that as it may, deliberately defaulting on promises made as part of a transaction is fraud. Not giving someone every piece of information that could possibly be useful to them is not.
    Contrary to your belief, "not giving someone every piece of information that could possibly be useful to them" could be fraud. For example: failure to disclose relevant information in your insurance or other legal papers is considered to be fraud.


    As soon as it becomes an issue of non-consent, it should be a matter of law, and not before.
    There is no "non-consent" because there is no force involved.


    I don't think it is necessary to read my mind. I have been quite clear about the distinction I am making, which is consent vs non-consent.
    "Consent" and "non-consent" are the terms you just picked up and use according to your subjective standard.

    See above. My ideas are quite different. They are subjective to each of us.

    As long as both parties follow the contractual obligations they consented to to the letter, its none of the governments business. If one person tries to keep someone's capital/labour/other value without fulfilling their own obligation, that is fraud.

    It doesn't seem like a terribly subjective line to me.
    I'm sure it doesn't seem that way to you or you would not think your arguement is so great.

    Let me lay it out for you:

    Some extreme anarchists may think people should be free to do whatever they want, even engage in violence, so they say: people can fight for themselves, what business is it of the government to interfere with personal dispute?

    Some people might have a problem with violence but think fraud is just a risk in business so they say: People can look out for their own interest, what business is it of the government to interfere in private business, except when there is violence involved?

    Some people (like you, I assume) might have a problem with fraud and violence, but that people knowingly taking advantage of each other is just part of business so they say: People can think for themselves, what business is it of the government to interfere in private transactions, except in cases of fraud and violence?

    Some people have problems with all of the above, and feel that sometimes government have to interfere to correct certain injustice (what are the injustices? Again it's subjective).

    There are all sorts of ideas about what the government can/should interfere in private transactions. Yours is just one of them, and so it's subjective.

    That was a risk she chose to take. Its none of the government's business.
    She didn't choose to sleep with someone who had AIDs. She chose to sleep with her husband whom she didn't know were unfaithful. She didn't know the risk.

    Your callousness is really something.

  6. #116
    Professor
    Layla_Z's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Last Seen
    05-31-17 @ 08:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    1,440
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Whos business is it?

    Quote Originally Posted by Panache View Post
    Hey TM, that's great, but suppose instead of exchanging fluids, two consenting adult males voluntarily agree to exchange pokemon cards instead, or to exchange casserole recipes. Now whose business is it?
    That's just wrong and it could completely destroy our entire society - the casserole recipes not the pokemon.
    ~Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity.
    ~I have as much authority as the Pope, I just don't have as many people who believe it.
    ~If all the world is a stage, where is the audience sitting?
    George Carlin

Page 12 of 12 FirstFirst ... 2101112

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •