![When you can safely skip the "early life" section [680x625 - 58KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/20L2az.jpg){kind=link}
Not trying to debate you. I am demonstrating that Lolbertarianism is ok with things that are scientifically and demonstrably bad for human beings because Lolbertarianism is foolish.
You obviously didn't understand basic moral principles
There are no moral principles in Lolbertarianism. You can't make anyone follow you or do as you want. What are you going to do, exile them? What if your neighbor invites them over? Exile don't You can't rely on "basic moral" and "basic economic" principles if you don't have any.
Oh, I have many ideas, but it's not child abuse according to lolbertariansim. They consented in good faith to take puberty blockers. Does Lolbertarianism believe in taking away individual sovereignty by force now? That would be a new one. And contrary to Lolbertarianism.
Anywho, it's nice to know, like most Lolberts, that you won't answer the original question. Oh you are more than happy to hold your nose high and not answer the question. Hopefully your silly notions of lolbertarianism will fade before you have to actually do more than navel-gaze upon a situation.
Look, man, you clearly don't get it and you're not intellectually honest enough to do the research you'd need to do in order to understand it. You're just some guy on the internet with not a lot of sense. Meanwhile, there are libraries' worth of material that you could answer these questions and correct your misunderstandings from. But you choose not to do that. You'd rather keep sending me asinine comments on Poal and pretend that I'm somehow supposed to answer all your questions.
As I said, I'm not going to do that, and if you don't want to put in the work, then that's on you. My time is more valuable than talking to some NPC, ok?
Answer the question, Midwit. If you can. A single question. Not all, a single question.
You still haven't. You've told me to research, you've changed the parameters of the original question. But you haven't, even once, said why it's wrong according to lolbertarianism. I have given you plenty of chances. I have even changed the parameters to make your fees fees better, but the arrangement is the same. A child of an age old enough to verbally agree, with parents permission, trades sex or their gender for something they value. It's a basic material for service transaction. Prostitution, which most lolberts think is A-ok.
Consenting 7 year old, Consenting Old Man with Candy, Consenting Parents. Nobody else can get involved because it's not their kid, their family, or their old man. Not child abuse because it's what the kid wants. And before you argue that perhaps, giving a kid something they want all the time is child abuse, let's say this is a one time thing. Kid gets candy and is ok with it, Old man is ok with it, parents are ok with it.
Lolbertarians have no answer. This is the Lolberts perfect free market world.
As I said, I'm not going to do that, and if you don't want to put in the work, then that's on you. My time is more valuable than talking to some NPC, ok?
And you have the lack of self-awareness to accuse me of intellectual dishonesty. Hah. Midwits going to midwit. Accuse em of being an NPC when all you've done is repeat the same SJW refrain of "JFGI"
I am beginning to think you don't know lolbertarianism.
(post is archived)