3 ms·
So does not allowing the majority to vote and handing voting rights to a few selfless individuals who will do what is best for society overall. Even killing a
by Lawtonfogle 11y ago
So does not allowing the majority to vote and handing voting rights to a few selfless individuals who will do what is best for society overall.
Even killing a person for their organs if it saves more people is a net gain in safety and health.
- HoHoHoNowIHaveA 11y agoIt's not a net gain for the populace since they will live in perpetual fear of being the next harvesting target. False analogy; not even close to the same thing.
- Lawtonfogle 11y agoSo now we include fear. So what about the fear that if one right is stripped from us then our other rights are also at risk.
- HoHoHoNowIHaveA 11y agoRights are taken all of the time. This is not a Libertarian issue which loves to take major policy issues and apply niche cases to decide them. Your right to steal property has been removed; it does not automatically threaten your right to vote. Debate the main issue on the main points otherwise you are simply bikeshedding. You said organ harvesting would be a net benefit to society; my argument is that it would not since we are killing a member of society purposefully. confiscating an assault rifle would not instill the same fear as the Government killing your neighbor for his liver.