>I claimed that a single individual disagrees with the proposition that legally reducing one's tax burden is immoral. You are butchering his position even wors

>I claimed that a single individual disagrees with the proposition that legally reducing one's tax burden is immoral. You are butchering his position even worse than I thought. He never said what you claim. The best case you can argue with his support is that the bluster of morals cannot be used to legally force someone to do more than the law requires. Never once does he come anywhere near "disagree[ing] with the proposition that legally reducing one's tax burden is immoral". He makes no moral judgement on the matter whatsoever. And I don't see how trawling nearly 100 years back in time to find a dissenting and disregarded opinion is anything other than selective quoting. You may as well have quoted yourself from 10 minutes prior.