Yes, you are implying your consent.
No, slaves were not participating in the passage of laws affecting themselves.
(This sets aside slavery’s violation of natural rights, focused only on implied consent by and through democracy here.)
No, not really. I’m not sure where you are reading, lol, but it might explain your utter disdain for libertarianism.
What contract? Can you show it to me?
But you’re also mistaken - it can’t be a contract, because you’re saying a person is bound by the duty to take care of the kids whether they consent to or not.
That’s entirely my point. It doesn’t square with libertarian theory because it involves an obligation for which consent is completely irrelevant.
I’m fine with that - I think there is such a duty, a moral duty, that exists beyond consent. And the existence of that duty suggests that other similar non-contractual duties also exist.
[quote]But this is why you hate libertarianism. It deals in principle first then works towards reality. You deal with reality of a situation first then work towards principle. Neither is wrong. But take the slavery example. A Libertarian would say you were never free to own people in the first place, even if the law said you could. You say you were free to do so because the law said you could… Do you see why the conversation is going to break down and go nowhere?
[/quote]
I don’t hate libertarianism, it’s just that it always leads to absurd results that can’t work in the real world.
And your slavery example misses the point - laws can be in violation of morality. Laws permitting slavery is a perfect example. Just because a law was passed doesn’t insure its moral adequacy. I never claimed as much.
But we were talking about taxation, money needed and used to pay for public services, not human bondage.
And I believe in exactly what you say is right - starting from principle and adjusting as needed to conform to the real world. That makes sense. Libertarianism is actually the opposite of what you say it is - it insists reality is something that it’s not, and never has been.