It makes a simple point. The line drawn by the pro-IP side is abitrary, and requires a central authority, as opposed to a principle, to declare what is and is not acceptable. My argument simply points out a logical extreme (although the ultimate extreme is complete totalitarianism). If there is not a principle involved in determining when it should/should not be implimented and to what degree, one opens the gate of hell for government involvement and decision making.
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