RE: Mandatory voting
March 27, 2015 at 9:37 am
(This post was last modified: March 27, 2015 at 9:38 am by Dystopia.)
(March 26, 2015 at 8:51 pm)Cato Wrote:I'm going to be a bitch about this:(March 26, 2015 at 6:45 pm)Aractus Wrote: (emphasis added).
Is there a point you're trying to make? Or are you agreeing with me?
Certainly you're not so daft as to drag this conversation down to the level of debating the inability of children to make decisions or the state's compelling interest to protect them from stupid parents are you?
You must realize that you're proving my observation of your sympathies for paternalism. Paternalism gets its name from the fact that in such systems states deprive its citizens of freedoms and responsibilities like a parent does a child.
An important rule in law is that if you forbid the lesser you must also forbid the greater by definition - For example, if you forbid theft you will probably forbid murder because it's a lot more serious. Using this line of thought, forbidding people from driving without seatbelts isn't really a paternalistic State's behaviour - Only someone who advocates complete laissez fair and libertarianism would think the prohibition of driving without seatbelts (which in itself is usually punishable with a fine) is a paternalistic behaviour - It's not, it's simply a coercive way to remind people to not kill themselves unnecessarily and in this case the ends justify the means. Like Aractus said, you could as well argue that taxes are oppressive because taxing is a lot more paternalistic than prohibitions to drive without seatbelt. Your freedom is never absolute.
Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And if you gaze long enough into an abyss, the abyss will gaze back into you