That what one can legally destroy is one's property. It follows that to prevent the suicide of someone who owns themselves would be a violation of their property rights. 1/?
-
Show this thread
-
If it is legal for parents to prevent their toddlers from running onto a busy highway it follows that the toddlers do not own themselves. 2/?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likesShow this thread -
If someone has property rights on something they have these rights until they voluntarily transfer them to someone else. It follows that if toddlers don't own themselves they also don't automatically own themselves as they become adults. 3/3
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
I have no confidence that there are no fatal flaws in this argument but it is funny that as a libertarian I never thought about why it is that people own themselves by default.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
Replying to @emareaf
many ways that property rights change without voluntary transfer though (e.g. life estate, trust as mentioned, forfeitures)
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
and many forms of property rights have fixed terms (like leases)
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.