Reason.com
Most Popular Stories
- St. Louis Cops Worry That In-Car Cameras 'Are Being Used Against Them' (5.23)
- Here Are the 15 Senators Who Voted to Stop Armed FDA Agents From Conducting Warrantless Raids on America's Farmers (Not One of Them is a Democrat) (5.24)
- Reason "Hero of Freedom" Larry Flynt's Latest Stunt? Photoshopping a Penis into Mouth of Conservative Pundit S.E. Cupp (5.24)
- When Government Privileges Trump the Rights of Citizens (5.25)
- Plastic Bag Ban Will Put Los Angeles In Landfill (5.23)
Reason RUPE: Public Opinion Survey
- Reason-Rupe: Wisconsinites Favor Increasing Public Union Retirement Contributions to Address Budget Deficit (5.25)
- Reason-Rupe Poll Finds Support for Public Union Reforms (5.25)
- New Poll: Obama Leads Romney In Wisconsin, But Gary Johnson Could Impact the Race (5.24)
- Wisconsin Recall: Walker Leads Barrett 50-42 Among Likely Voters (5.24)
- Reason-Rupe Poll: Walker Leads Barrett 50-42, Obama Leads Romney 46-36 (5.24)
advertisements
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsSite comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.
|8.16.05 @ 5:20PM|#
On the one hand, I think prostitution should be legal...
On the other hand, I am opposed to violent theft... er... coerced "charity".
On could make the case that we would win whether he loses or not;
If he wins, the world will be a slightly less un-free place.
If he loses, charity funded by theft will be less efficient, increasing the likelihood that some people will begin to see voluntary charities as being more reliable than ones funded by taxation.
Actually, either way we lose; government officials and their friends will continue to confiscate our wealth and redistribute it toward their ends. Any difference due to this case will be so miniscule as to be lost in the noise.
|8.16.05 @ 5:29PM|#
Darn, and here your teaser was leaving me panting for a hot-n-heavy tale of UN graft & corruption!
Jeff|8.16.05 @ 11:18PM|#
Points will be awarded to for the best use of the term "money shot" in this thread.
|8.16.05 @ 11:48PM|#
great article and great man is mr harvey.
|8.17.05 @ 8:44AM|#
I'm inclined to support anything that results in less government expenditure, even though the GWB administration's policies here are clearly unconstitutional. Kind of wish a better case had been chosen.
|8.17.05 @ 9:09AM|#
GWB administration's policies here are clearly unconstitutional
If Bush say they are constitutional they are, period, end of discussion.
|8.17.05 @ 9:30AM|#
But what if the Constitution says otherwise?
Or does Jebus make it all kosher?