Description

Moral Challenge by Carl Watner

See More See Less

Subscribe

Leave us a review, comment or subscribe!

Meet the hosts

Rodger is a long-time libertarian activist, the founder of PaxLibertas Productions, host of The LAVA Flow podcast, Vice Chairman of the NHLP, Regional Captain for the Foundation for New Hampshire Independence and former Chairman and Secretary of the Libertarian Party of Arkansas. Rodger has also served on the national Libertarian Party Judicial Committee.

discussions

  • I’m very excited to see this group!  I think that many Christians are wrestling with the idea of their faith and how it relates to their political outlook–having a ready defense of liberty from a Christian outlook is very important to message these ideas to interested Christians. I don’t know how many of you were able to attend ISFLC, so some of you may have already seen this, but I was able to participate as a panelist with five other young Christian libertarians on the issue of how we, as Christians, approach libertarianism.  We were able to upload the panel to YouTube which you can watch here if you didn’t get to see it already/weren’t at ISFLC. As one of the panelists, I would be happy to hear your feedback on the arguments presented in the panel and/or any other general ideas about how to understand libertarianism from a Christian framework.  What are the best ways to message libertarianism to Christians and Christianity to libertarians?

    Jump to Discussion Post 0 replies
  • The next Capitalism & Morality seminar will be held in Vancouver on 21st July 2018. The program is in early stages, but it is easier and cheaper to book flights and hotel for Vancouver early. Here is the seminar registration link: http://jayantbhandari.com/capitalism-morality/capitalism-morality-2018/

    Jump to Discussion Post 8 replies
  • How does a libertarian society deal with both criminal negligence, negligent homicide, negligent driving and negligence in general? This is the point where most disputes lie within libertarianism because NAP non aggression principle assumes intentional aggression. Most of the biggest problems are not because A agresses on B but because A is either ignorant of the risks or disbelieves past warnings. Ignorant is a word people often use without thinking. It does not mean the same thing as stupid, a child or just wrong. It means, particularly in the biblical phase willingly ignorant, taking a risk that may affect others badly. Where these effects are direct its easy, sue the idiot, where they are distant, time or place, its much harder. How do you know who to sue? Should Bill have the right to drive dangerously on the road, given the starting premise that its a private road, and by his actions risk harming others and imposing a significant enforcement cost, etc, on the roads owners? At the very least raised insurance premiums, tolls and other pricing, etc. This is the root of all moral debates. Should Jenny have sex willy nilly spreading VD about the place and thus costing others via the hospital and medical costs and insurances. Its also at the heart of the vaccine debate. Are non vaccinating parents negligent or are vaccination parents risking a 0.1% chance of an Autistic kid? How does a libertarian society judge the case where there are two opposite and mutually exclusive choices. Both probably imperfect. Where you can’t sell both risk/ no risk  choices as a separate product in the market; which is the standard libertarian free market solution.

    Jump to Discussion Post 18 replies
  • https://herox.com/explore/

    Jump to Discussion Post 0 replies
  • This question will surely drive minarchists crazy. Procedural image generation is computer generated imagery based off of algorithms and formulas, like x=y. Here is a blog which describes it, procworld.blogspot.com, mundane things like asteroids, zebras, buildings. I don’t know if procedural child porn is possible today, or if so, if it exists, but it there were such a program, is it morally acceptable to restrict that speech? Computer rendered child porn images are already illegal, but that is just the images. Procedural programs would just be a program that looks like any other program text. If it is morally permissible to restrict that speech, then what about a program that generates encryption, or algorithmically generates a slanderous poem?  

    Jump to Discussion Post 0 replies