Quote Originally Posted by honedright View Post
All that I have suggested is a search for ways and means of helping those in need without relying on acts of immorality. You and some of your supporters, on the other hand, are suggesting that there is no other way to repair society but through the strong arm taking and redistribution of others peoples property against their will. Is it because the good intentions of the left are creating, via unintended consequences, an expanding class of welfare dependents to the point where voluntary charity can no longer meet the needs of those less fortunate? And common sense dictates that more of the same will continue to only exacerbate the problem. Over 80 years of progressive "do good" policy from the "New Deal" to the "Great Society" and now "Hope and Change" seem to prove my theory as things seem to be getting worse and not better.
See, the problem is that you do not recognize all this immoral taxation is established in the very creation of this country and has been around since the beginning.
Even if you think the earlier taxation was fair, the excise act of 1791 is the type of immoral redistributive theft you have problem with and it's 2 years after the constitution - it was defended with a very real threat of violence by one of the most prominent founders. Way, way before your big enemies of 'new deal', 'liberals', 'great society', 'progressives', 'hope and change'...


Quote Originally Posted by honedright View Post
Ah, but another false choice, this time it's either your way or anarchy. Why not the rule of law as written in the Constitution. Nice try, but no cigar.
That's your own set up of choice because you are rejecting the constitutionally established rule of law in form of taxes enacted by the lawfully elected representatives, challenged in the constitutionally ordained court and reaffirmed (you know the "big brains I've deemed to have greater authority over me" and who have "enslaved me to their whims").

The only lawful way for this to change is if the american people vote different politicians in office, who would appoint different supreme court and then pass and affirm as constitutional laws to your liking. But as you can notice the country has been collectively choosing to go in a completely different direction.
BTW Somalia is not an anarchy - it does have a government but it's a very weak one - seems it is a lot closer to what you want than USA is (or ever were).