One Law

Re-thinking governance. We only need one law - the Non-Aggression Principle - the foundation of libertarianism - to maximize justice, peace, and prosperity.

  • Home
  • About
  • Resources
  • Pages & Categories
  • Contact

December 5, 2017 by SC Striebeck

Can States Compel You to Bake a Cake Against Your Will? The Supreme Court Will Decide.

Can States Compel You to Bake a Cake Against Your Will? The Supreme Court Will Decide.

Masterpiece is the first such case to make it to the justices.

Source: Can States Compel You to Bake a Cake Against Your Will? The Supreme Court Will Decide.  By Stephanie Slade at reason.com

Masterpiece exposes another gross example of democracy/federalism gone bad …which always occurs… given sufficient time.

But more specifically, such cases show the limitation of nearly all laws, but especially those which create arbitrary classes and bright-line definitions that eventually reveal substantial uncertainty, create confusion, and then worse, become the basis for legal conclusions that are beyond absurd …like forcing a baker to bake a cake for someone …for whatever reason. And, not to mention, that such laws are not practically enforceable; thus, a waste of resources.

But perhaps most importantly, affirmation of such laws fuels the expansion of the veiled slavery under which virtually all of us live. I can only pray that SCOTUS doesn’t it take itself too seriously, and relieves us of another pseudo-intellectual juggernaut against those who earn their livelihood through mutual consent versus those that feel compelled to enforce this tripe, and can afford to do so only through the force government because there is no economic check on the theft of taxation.

Note:  The views expressed are solely the opinion of the author.
Conceptual and title source: reason.com
Media source: reason.com
Image source: reason.com; Katherine Mangu-Ward

Share this:

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • More
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Filed Under: Anarcho-capitalism, Anti-American, Anti-Slavery, Central Planning, Checks and Balances, Choice, Decentralization, Democracy, Despotism, Federalism, Force, Free market, Free market anarchism, Freedom, Government, Non-Aggression, Politics, SCOTUS, Self-Ownership, Taxation, Tyranny, United States Constitution

November 3, 2015 by SC Striebeck

What’s More Important Than the Second Amendment?

I recently viewed several commercials produced by the National Rifle Association (NRA) such as the one above where an individual gives an allegedly more personal account as to the importance of the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.

I thought the above commercial was an excellent example of not only why the the Second Amendment is important and should be guarded, but also because it more than alluded to the deeper fundamental connection to self-ownership.

What is self-ownership?

Without a lot of philosophical posturing, self-ownership is exactly what it says: you own yourself.

We each own, control and are responsible for our physical body, mental capacity and spiritual being.

If you are anti-slavery, then you believe in self-ownership. As such, your ownership can never be separated from yourself.

The ideal of self-ownership is the fundamental basis from which the idea of nonaggression and property rights emanate. In turn, this spawns the deductive development and underpinnings of libertarianism in its purest form. This continuity stemming from your very being to everything in the outside world is what makes Anarcho-Libertarianism the most fascinating, consistent and comprehensive socioeconomic political philosophy yet discovered. But I digress.

What is interesting to note about these commercials and in particular the above, is that it is not whether the Second Amendment supports the individual right to bear arms (that’s probably a given!), but rather the reason why we have the Second Amendment. Owning your body necessarily implies that you should always have the right to defend it with a force commensurate or greater to that of an aggressor.

If this were not the case, then self-ownership of one’s mind, body and soul would mean nothing. If your body is not defensible as a natural right by your existence, by you alone as your own person, then you really don’t own it.

Although I am generally a supporter of the NRA and most certainly the broadest interpretation of the Second Amendment, it seems more important that people understand why there is a Second Amendment; and, not whether it was intended to include only pistols, but not assault rifles or only for the military use, etc. To be caught in the resultant diatribe, is to miss the point entirely. This series of ads better hits the mark as to why we have the Second Amendment and from where it is derived.

If we understand the more basic human right that the framers were most likely trying to protect, irrespective of grammatical or interpretive nuances, then we have a better answer as to why the Second Amendment should be more broadly interpreted and closely guarded. Allowing individuals to unequivocally bear arms as each deems fit is inherent to self-ownership.

So the ultimate message:  “I am freedom’s safest place” …could not be any truer. Real freedom is inseparable from self-ownership.

Note: The views expressed are solely the opinion of the author.
Conceptual source: Murray N. Rothbard, Hans Hermann-Hoppe and Ludwig von Mises
Media source: National Rifle Association (NRA)

 

 

 

 

 

Share this:

  • Click to share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window) Reddit
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
  • More
  • Click to print (Opens in new window) Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Filed Under: Anarcho-libertarianism, Anti-Slavery, Force, Gun rights, Non-Aggression, Second Amendment, Self defense, Self-Ownership

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • 2

Recent Posts

  • The Internet, AI, You and a Lot More Lawyers
  • Entrepreneurs Can Break The Vicious Cycle in Healthcare
  • Is More Regulation Over Employee Salaries Good for Employees?
  • The Truth About Society & Fueling the Polarization of Culture?
  • So What if TikTok is a National Security Risk
  • Home
  • About
  • Resources
  • Pages & Categories
  • Contact

Copyright © 2025 · Generate Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

%d