|
[ Return to Contents
| Post a Reply
| Post a new message
]
The problem with this argument
Posted by sdog on Mar 05 2006
There is a fatal flaw in your argument. You clearly pointed out the fact that that we chose to live where we want, and by those choices, there are opportunities and costs. No one can argue that.
However, here is the difference. You chose to live where you want, and then expect GOVERNMENT to ease your lifestyle by providing you special privaleges based soley upon your residency. Whent the GOVERNMENT provides you your resources, it comes at the expense of other tax payers, citizens, etc. Quite honestly, why should I have to sacrifice to support YOUR choice of residency? The bottom line is I shouldn't. You have no right to infringe upon my rights because you live in a remote area.
Again, this is why I think special hunt seasons are fine, I am not really giving up anything because of your choice, but when lands are CUTOFF from me, as a taxpayer and citizen of Alaska, so you, also a taxpayer and citizen can hunt an area exclusively....it is wrong.
Previous: choice FBKShunter Mar 06 2006
Next: here's the problem with that argument twodux Mar 05 2006
 Message Thread:
|
