ひげ
@matrix Conservative "says he believes in facts over feelings but still thinks loli is actual child abuse"
Libertarian "it's just a drawing bro"
@beardalaxy @matrix That's still saner than libertarians taking their morality (feelings) to the point they justify actual child murder
>Applying our theory to parents and children, this means that a parent does not have the right to aggress against his children, but also that the parent should not have a legal obligation to feed, clothe, or educate his children, since such obligations would entail positive acts coerced upon the parent and depriving the parent of his rights. The parent therefore may not murder or mutilate his child, and the law properly outlaws a parent from doing so. But the parent should have the legal right not to feed the child, i.e., to allow it to die.
@applejack @matrix yeah that gets into more anarchy stuff rather than just Libertarianism. The anarchist argument would probably be that parents who are doing that can be justifiably murdered and the kids can go to a better home that will take care of them or something, but knowing people in general, they either wouldn't do anything or they would kill the parents and then just not do anything about the kids.
