3 ms·
Ok, so maybe the original position you presented need to be qualified somehow, because as it was written, it sounds like you would be opposed to all coercion an
by rebuilder 5y ago
Ok, so maybe the original position you presented need to be qualified somehow, because as it was written, it sounds like you would be opposed to all coercion and feel personally responsible for stopping it, somehow. I was curious about that somehow part, that’s all.
- howaboutnope 5y agoI oppose ruling via violence and murder. And generally, I think coercion needs to be justified, and often can be. When a child runs into a busy street, and yelling "stop" doesn't suffice, then you grab that child to keep it from run over. That's coercion, and perfectly fine in my books. As are taxes (as a general idea, of course the corrupt ways they're often spent aren't), and many other things. And I know I am personally responsible, feeling doesn't enter into it. I'm not religious, and nobody can take the responsibility of judging and acting from me. There is nobody to hide behind, nobody to take orders from. The buck stops with me just like it stops with you.