The difference between statism and me

Guess what- there are things I don't like. Yet, I have no desire to impose my likes or dislikes on anyone else.

I don't like pit bulls. But I would never advocate banning them.

I don't like drug abuse. But I wouldn't advocate criminalizing it or caging people for doing it.

I don't like rap music. Or sports. Or "excessive" tattoos. Or loud cars. Or crew cuts. Or business suits. The list could go on and on. Everyone has a long list of "don't likes". Yours won't be the same as mine. You and I will justify our opinions to ourselves, and to others if asked, but that justification comes down to there being some things certain people don't like, but others do. It's purely subjective.

There is no right answer to "do you like...?" as long as you aren't talking about aggression or property violation. Even if you "like" to attack people or steal their property or trespass (in which case you may have a career in "law enforcement")- you have no right to do so, and your victims would be right to kill you in order to stop you.

But, everything else is just a matter of opinion. Even if your opinion is very strong and popular.

This difference was illustrated quite clearly by the case of the woman recently arrested in North Carolina for having sex with her dog. I don't "agree with" people engaging in sex with non-human animals. I wouldn't do it. I would probably avoid anyone I knew had done such a thing. But I don't support sending cops to arrest her. An "arrest" is a violent kidnapping. If you resist being kidnapped by bullies with badges you will be murdered by them. All "laws" are ultimately a threat to kill anyone who defies the opinions of ethical cripples and moral degenerates. Why can't you dislike things without thinking it's OK to rob people in the name of "taxation" and then use their stolen money to violate their liberty?

I understand the disgust certain acts trigger. I even agree in many cases. But to then turn your disgust into an excuse to violate others is really sick.

Just who do the people who applaud this woman's arrest believe she victimized? The dog? Rights aren't applicable across species lines. You have no right to not be eaten by a bear and a deer has no right to not be shot by a hunter. I don't trust people who are cruel to animals, but they haven't violated any other person.

Maybe some of them believe she has victimized herself. That is up to her to decide. Either people own themselves, or they are slaves owned by someone else. If she owns herself, then she is within her rights to use her body and life as she sees fit, as long as she isn't violating someone else. Up to and including destroying herself.

Or perhaps "society" or "community standards" have been harmed. If this is the case I'll slap you right in your aura for believing in such a silly concept.

It's not that I am arguing that sex with dogs should be legal; it's that it shouldn't be illegal. Even though I find it disgusting. I know where my boundaries lie. Apparently statists don't. And I suppose that's the real difference between statism and me.

.