Pre-Header Tagline

You don't coerce or injure others. Why can politicians do it?

NEW! Isn’t drug use immoral?

How to answer this “war on drugs” argument

Today’s action…

  • Read the 323 word article below …or… even better, GO read the article on our website, where you can take the following actions…
  • Use the slider to register your opinion
  • Use the social networking tools on that page to share the article on Facebook, Google+, and Twitter. Do all three to have maximum impact!

Doing this will…

  • Place new ideas in new minds
  • Locate, recruit, and activate people who agree with you
  • Move some people who disagree in a libertarian direction

Here’s the article, or read it on the ZAP website

Is drug prohibition justified because it’s immoral to use drugs?

Many people think so. Others disagree. This suggests something potentially important. There may be a crucial difference between rules that govern…

  • How we treat others
  • How we treat ourselves

Standards like the Zero Aggression Principle (Don’t initiate force) and the Golden Rule govern how we treat others. They lead to laws against assaults, murder, fraud, and theft. They are universal because everyone agrees with them, except perhaps for a few sociopaths.

In contrast to this are moral beliefs that govern how we treat ourselves—what we ingest, how we worship, what we wear, and how we have sex. There’s far less agreement about this kind of morality. It’s highly personal. It’s personal morality.

But what if your personal morality is also God’s morality?

Whose version of God’s morality should the law adopt? Should it be the Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, Hindu, or Buddhist version? Should Christians have to submit to Sharia law just because some Muslims think their personal morality is also God’s morality? Here’s the crucial point…

Imposing drug prohibition on people against their will requires you to trample more fundamental moral precepts, like the Golden Rule and the Zero Aggression Principle.

Do you really think that will make God happy? Please consider…

The power you give politicians to force your values on others, can also be used by others to force their values on you, including their religious beliefs.

So what do you really want?

Do you want the law to enforce your personal morality on unwilling people, or do you want it to protect universal moral standards like the Zero Aggression Principle and the Golden Rule? You can’t have both. You must choose.

If you choose to restrict law and coercion to social morality, then you still retain the right to use persuasion to promote your personal standards. And isn’t that the most ethical way to teach such values?

How does this argument influence your views about drug prohibition?

  • Go here and use the slider at the bottom of the page to register your opinion
  • Use the social networking tools you’ll find on that page to share the article on Facebook, Google+, and Twitter. Do all three to have maximum impact.
  • If you haven’t signed one of the petitions on this issue, please do so while you’re there.

These actions will…

  • Place new ideas in new minds
  • Locate, recruit, and activate people who agree with you
  • Move some people who disagree in a libertarian direction

Thanks for your participation in our work. If you want to help us reach even more people, consider starting a monthly pledge or make a one-time donation here. You can also get our new ZAP bumper sticker!

ZAP The State and have a nice day,

Perry Willis & Jim Babka
Co-creators of the Zero Aggression Project

P.S. Do you find these arguments unique and interesting? There are more like them. After you take this action, return to the campaign and look around for more! You can share any and all of them in future online conversations.

By: Perry Willis

This entry was posted in Drug Prohibition, How to Think, Morality and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink. (No Comments)

Leave a reply