CorpMediaSux
Member
- Sep 13, 2007
- 108
- 19
- 6
I agree with that statement. You've yet to demonstrate how compulsory taxation is the equivalent of slavery. You asserting it does not make it so.There's no good reason to implement slavery.
You agree, right?
Yes, charity is not the issue here. The stabilty of American society, however, is.And MY point was that we have the right to choose to NOT give to charity, a statement made in response to your question as to why she HAVE to be forced. Were you going to address that point, or should I assume your question was sufficiently answered?
None of this in any way defeats my point.
Fine, but all you've done is reduce the meaning and impact of the term slavery NOT linked taxation with the horrendous history of African American chattel bondage or other forms of violently coerced labor or sexual slavery. If you insist on characterizing taxation as slavery then this argumentForcing people to provide the means for others to exercise their rights is, necessarily, slavery.
No longer become true. There are very good reasons for compulsory taxation surrounding healthcare (I've laid them out, you've ignored them). If you choose to rhetorically call that taxation slavery, so be it. That is your characterization. It does nothing to make taxation more or less moral or more or less justified. African American chattel slavery isn't horrific because of the WORD slavery, it was horrific because of what it did to enslaved people and how people were treated in that system. Thats why I say your attempt to link taxation to slavery is cheap and offensive on your part.There's no good reason to implement slavery
Because we do so everyday? Because the constitution was written over two hundred years ago and could not have anticipated the terms and conditions of modern lifestyle. Because no set of law or regulation is inflexible, permanent, inalterable and rigid.So, you agree that any such legislation is Unconstitutional.
Why should anyone support unconstitutional laws?