Clint O'Dell wrote:
> >It is not that simple. If you can't take care of yourself, society
> >(government, private organizations, your family) will take care of you.
> And they shouldn't is my point. A society that chooses to burden themselves
> is a stupid society. A society of ignorant, stupid citizens or
True, maybe they shouldn't. And maybe parents are suckers,
for loving and taking
care of their children.
> >It simply is not in the nature of most of us, to enjoy luxuries while
> >people around us are starving.
> Obviously you have never lived on the streets. I had lived on the streets
> for 2 years and I had also held well paid positions in large companies. I
> speak from experience when I say most people do enjoy luxuries while people
> around them are starving. People starve if they choose to, why should you
> care what life they choose for themselves?
Street people aren't on the street because they can't take
care of themselves.
They are there because the have social problems. They either don't want help or
they drive away people who could help them.
> >Hence, society will try to pressure you into getting educated no matter
> Most people who are homeless are there due to mental illness. It doesn't
> matter how much education you give them they will never get any better, and
> who's to say they want to.
That is true. The idea that everybody can be helped is a
fantasy. But it is a
fantasy that many people believe.
> Give them the choice of augmenting their mind
> but don't force them. If they choose to stay the way they are then so be
> it. It's not my problem and I won't allow it to be either. Why will I
> burden myself over someone who doesn't want to be helped? I'm not. A
> burdened society brings it upon themselves.
If you pay taxes, you pay for it.
> >It may well be your education is nobody else's business, but society does
> >have a vested interest in making sure that you are capable of taking care
> >of yourself and making a positive contribution to society.
> Again, don't. Society burdens themselves when they force people to do
> things they don't want to do. If someone wants to kill themselves whether
> they are mental or not, so what. It's a choice they make and not for me to
> tell them otherwise.
Actually, if all it took to kill ourselves was to wish to be
dead for 1 second,
we would all be dead. If someone truly wants to kill themselves, then fine.
But in most cases people who are 'rescued' are grateful. Don't argue with
societies impulse to protect its members. Argue with the harmful, dysfunctional
way it does it.
> >I think it is 'wrong headed' the way society tries to pressure people into
> >getting more years of 'education', instead of encouraging learning of all
> >types. But society looks after its own self interest, and attempting to
> >make society not do that because of 'principals' is like arguing with a
> >hungry lion. You can't win.
> Winning is just a matter of showing people their ignorance. Start by
> tearing apart their stupid religious and moral faith. Then give them a new
> logical moral. The new moral code is based of the self. What it takes for
> the individual to survive and live any way it pleases.
Ayn Rand who wrote about the Virtue of Selfishness, didn't
argue with the
impulse people have to help each other. Instead she argued that people should
help each other for perfectly selfish reasons.