🚀 go-pugleaf

matts@lainet.com (Matt Silberstein) wrote:

>In article <jtbooker.16.3001E72B@nando.net>, jtbooker@nando.net (Jon) 
>wrote:
>>
>>merely the attempted justifications of those who place themselves as 
>>judge and jury in forcing their values on the rest of society.

>Which brings me to my second point. I have trouble with the free market 
>arguement implied in this discussion.  Why is it better to vote with my 
>pocket book and force people into bankruptcy and not vote with my 
>franchise and outlaw action?  Both have values and both can be misused.  
>If I vote to outlaw smoking in public I am not making myself judge and 
>jury, I am setting the rules for judges and juries. 

Because when you vote with your pocketbook, you can do what you want.
You maintain your freedom. Smokers and non-smokers, willing to pay the
price, are free to do as they wish.
When you impose these things throught he govt, you involve the
COERCIVE power of the govt--and freedom is gone.