A Usenet persona calling itself KMAN wrote:

No
wonder you are a gun nut. Your utopia would obviously be everyone living in
a self-sustaining dwelling with a giant electrified fence to protect them
from having to be in contact with other people or even - gasp - where people
might care about each other.

I see. Respecting other people's right to live their lives as they wish
without having the government or one's nosy neighbors interfere is anathema
to you?

Living without a concern for others is anathema to me.

One can have concern for others without being compelled by law to enable
their bad decision making and behavior. Nobody's asking you to live without
concern. You can have as much concern as you like. You can give all your
goods to the poor and spend your life serving the poor while wearing
sackcloth and ashes if you like. You may not, however, compel anyone else to
join you unwillingly. That would be immoral and repugnant. Each individual
gets to choose how much concern he or she shows to others. It's not the
government's duty or authority to compel it.


Contributing to public education and public health is a simple and effective
means of showing concern for others.

Indeed. However, being compelled to to contribute to those causes by force
of law is morally repugnant.


My "utopia" is a land where people get to do what they want, so long as they
don't harm others

The fact that a system of private sector health care will cater only to
those who can afford to pay means that supporters of said private sector
health care are indeed harming others.

It's a rather large logical leap to blame those who dislike coercive
socialism and favor free-market health care for "harm" that others might
cause themselves through bad planning or misfortune.


--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser