Hacker News Reader

Sure. It is possible to be against theft and for compassion at the same time.

However I am not in CA and it seems “society” over there has decided its not interested in housing homeless moms.

If society is unwilling to take responsibility, then society has no right to expect obedience.

Just a while ago weren’t you arguing that social needs trump individual rights. (I.e. the right to property.) If society through its chosen spokesmen decides homeless moms don’t need to be provided housing (they are still free to find it in some legal way.) why can it not compel their obedience?

I don't think I argue from social needs. I solely argue from individual needs and rights; the need of the individual to food and shelter; the right to existence; the appropriation of the common good for individual property. Please let me know if I diverge from that at any point, since "social needs" are highly subjective, whereas the individual needs usually aren't.

https://i.imgur.com/322zDhK.jpg

Addendum;

Sure, society can always compel and force somebody to obedience. That's why a society usually tries to monopolize the exertion of power through law enforcement. That might even give society the power to expel a homeless mother along with her children from a house that's been empty for 35 years.

My argument is not about ability but about morality.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com