Comment: It's interesting...

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: A Rose By Any Other Name... (see in situ)

It's interesting...

...that a parallel argument was made for thousands of years by philosophers and theologians justifying slavery -- that while it was not the ideal from prelapsarian times, it was basically a necessary evil in a fallen world, with the polis or society dependent on it, just as it was dependent on coercive government. Thus, you have folks like St. Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Plato, Aristotle justifying both things in similar ways. In fact some even saw slavery as a moral advancement over killing those captured in battle -- keep them alive in exchange for labor.

If this kind of argument has collapsed for slavery over time, with revolutions in moral understanding and societal structures, where such postlapsarian justifications seem obnoxious, why should we accept that slavery to a coercive State that claims a moral authority to steal, kidnap and kill not granted to anyone else should be excused and justified on such grounds? Just as the rope of chattel slavery has been cut, why not other forms of slavery.

Hence, my posting of the balloon clip below -- are we not perhaps being too much like Adams is portrayed here, and not enough like Jefferson?