Here is the thing. Nothing is absolute.
People who say that "I have no obligation to pay for your mental sickness" are wrong, because then I can say "I have no obligation to honor your gun rights". You cannot be absolute in a society/system where certain absolutes are recognized.
Everything is on a degree. Look, if someone is certifiably insane, and the government has to lock him up and try and treat him, you could arguments from both sides.
1) What about that man's freedom? Shouldn't he be allowed to be insane?
2) Why should I have to pay(in taxes) for the government to take care of him?
Both are valid points. But ultimately, I am OK with that. Because the alternative is to have an insane man out on the streets.
Another example. Gun rights.
Should the government have prevented the sale of the semi-automatic that this crazy shooter used? Should they have forced the theater to allow people to carry guns inside? Or perhaps forced them to provide adequate security?
If you did those things, you may be a little safer. But the downside is that government gets to tell you what guns you can own, how you can use it, etc. It isn't worth it. That's not worth the trouble. I am willing to risk more violence, more gun problems, the risk of less safety, just so the government gets out of my life.
Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:
Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here:
Content of posts and comments on the Daily Paul represent the opinions of the original posters, and are not endorsed, approved, or otherwise representative of the opinions of the Daily Paul, its own