=“LeafByNiggle, post:579, topic:447347, full:true”]
Yes, you have said this, but the reasoning you give is that taxing to to give to the poor is theft. But you misused the word “theft” because “theft” only applies when something is taken from you without legal authority.
While I am making no comparison of the severity, that argument could have been and was used by slave holders. Ignoring the chattel property aspect, slave owners took the labor of their slaves against their will. Indentured servitude was of a similar arrangement.
Here is were the legal and moral meet. The fact that the acting of taxing you is legal is the very fact that makes it not theft. And if it isn’t theft, your argument that it is immoral is gone.
Again, you are conflating the issue. Taxation is legal. Even federal usurpation of powers not enumerated is not the issue. The issue is is it moral to confiscate the property of one person to give it to another? It is immoral.
Your comparisons to charity are irrelevant because taxing you to give to the poor is not claimed to be charity.
That’s not true. People who oppose government wealth redistribution are often accused of lacking charity and compassion. If it isn’t charity, it isn’t uncharitable to oppose it.
So the fact that it is not voluntary is irrelevant. It doesn’t have to be voluntary to be both legal and moral.
From a standpoint of morality, the coercion involved is relevant. In fact, that is the only morality question involved. Is it moral to take property and the fruits of someone’s labor at the point of a gun and give it to another? It might be legal, but it isn’t moral or scriptural.