GUEST COMMENTARY — Some liberals have recently been chattering on the internet about photos of Paul Ryan and the fact that he has hunted animals before. A few of these liberals seem to be offended at seeing such photographs by stating that Ryan is “insensitive.”

Are these liberals also against abortion? Could abortion and the killing of any other life not be considered the same thing? Of course liberals are not against abortion. They have fought for years to be able to rip an infant out its mother’s womb or stab it with a giant needle and suck out its brain so they can throw its bloody carcass in the trash — this way they have no responsibilities toward bringing a new life into the world. Yet, these same liberals have no problem with chowing down on an expensive steak (better if it’s at the expense of someone else), wearing leather shoes and leather belts and any other use of animal products.

Some liberals might object by saying that Ryan was indulging in “blood sports.” Abortion doctors get paid to participate in “blood sports” every day.

(Guest Commentary submitted by H.Y. Tharpe, Latrobe, PA)

While everyone needs revenue, only criminals and politicians insist that they have to get it through violence. The criminals, however, do not pretend they’re doing it in order to serve the public, and taxes make politicians public masters rather than public servants.

Certainly, the present size of government at all levels depends on taxation – not only the explicit kind, but the invisible kind that the Federal Reserve System imposes through inflation of the money supply. People probably wouldn’t voluntarily pay to bomb, invade, and occupy other countries, bail out large banks and other corporations, and try to dictate the personal choices of others. Good riddance!

Government-monopolized services such as education and health care could be provided for less than half the cost if they could be returned to the voluntary sector of society with cost-raising regulations abolished and incentives restored. Both mutual aid groups and charitable donations filled gaps prior to the rise of the Welfare State for those in need with an efficiency that is impossible when those in charge of aid get more money and power for themselves the worse the job they perform. We’ll have to take some personal responsibility for our own lives and stop using the excuse Ebenezer Scrooge made that his taxes supported institutions for the poor so he could ignore them.

It is obscene for those claiming to protect life, liberty, and property to obtain their revenue by violating life, liberty, and property. There are plenty of ways to obtain revenue without force: insurance, user fees, advertising, lotteries, and donations are already used by many local and state governments for a good portion of their revenue. Let them be true public servants and live within the means that these sources provide. People might even pay more voluntarily once they’re no longer forced to turn over 1/3 to 1/2 of their wealth to governments.

Ultimately, it is about the type of society we want to have. We can accomplish a lot voluntarily when we mutually respect each other’s lives and property. It begins by respecting the right of people to keep the fruits of their labor. A good start would be the abolition of the personal income tax, which only adds insult to the injury of theft by invading every part of the taxpayer’s privacy as well as making the second week of April a misery instead of a time to enjoy the early spring.

– Libertarian National Chair, Mark Hinkle.

WilkinsSpinalCare.com