The first rule of the philosophy of liberty is …

by CynthiaYockey on September 24, 2011

You Own Yourself [boldfacing mine]:

While self-ownership may seem like a simple and self-evident concept, I believe that most Americans residing in the land of the free would become very uncomfortable when the full implications of self-ownership become evident. We know for example that many of our fellow Americans are Statists in one form or another and the premise of all Statists is that we are actually owned by the state and that all of our liberties and rights come from the state. They also believe that the product of our lives is first the property of the state and what the state chooses to give back to us then becomes ours.

The other group that completely rejects the concept of self-ownership is what I will call the moralists. Most of these people in the U.S. believe that they are Christian. In a country like Saudi Arabia they are Muslims. Either way they are convinced that whatever life choices that they have made for themselves is also good for their neighbors and seek to impose, through the force of government, that way of life on others. What I find so dangerous about these people is that they believe that their right to impose their morality on others comes not from a manmade philosophy, like Socialism or Fascism, but from God himself. Because of this aberrant belief, arguing with these folks takes on the equivalent, to them at least, of the appearance of arguing with God, and we all know only a fool would argue with God.

H/T Red State Virginia. Be sure to read the whole thing.

I’ve only recently started to learn about property rights in relation to liberty and free markets. But the instant I heard of the private property concept of ownership of self it struck me that it applies to gay equality. That’s because the procreation-based arguments against marriage equality assume you are not your own property but rather the property of the state and that the state regulates marriage in exchange for babies. However, it seems to me that government regulates marriage due to the number of property rights and types of agency (such as the powers to make healthcare decisions and post mortem funeral arrangements) associated both with marriage and divorce.

Thoughts, gentle readers?

Note: This was originally posted on August 17, 2011. It was lost by my web host, so I am restoring it manually. I could not recover comments for this post.

Follow conservativelez on Twitter

  • Stray Yellar Dawg

    He’s absolutely correct you know? Michelle Bachmann is no Sarah Palin.

    Accept no substitutes!

    • I just hope she decides to run. 

  • Loriheine

    I quite agree with you.  But why on earth, then, do you have a “Bachmann for President” ad on your own blog?

    It’s pretty scary.  The woman looks like the Bride of Chucky.  I know you need to sell ad space, but get me some brain bleach, please!

    • Google serves the ads according to the key phrases it finds in the posts and your own search history. I had a lot of fun with Stacy McCain a couple of years ago when he was more active in denouncing gay marriage equality and Google started serving gay dating service advertisements to The Other McCain: “How Robert Stacy McCain became irresistible to men.”

      • Graumagus

        This is but one reason among many I have always refused to sell advertising on my blog (well, back in the day when I used to get traffic that is, my lazy rear gets about 10 hits a week if I’m lucky now).

        I’d rather be beholden to no one…

        That said, if you end up with a “Marcus Bachmann school of Manliness” ad on here you may owe me a new keyboard 🙂

  •   I  used to like Bachmann, but I don’t like what I’m hearing about her lately.  When she hired Rollins, and he immediately put his foot in his mouth, I was very put off by that.  I really don’t think she has a chance in beating O.  I’m not enthused by any of the candidates so far.  I guess I’m waiting for Palin, as I think a lot of people are. 

Previous post:

Next post: