Not shooting the messenger, good observation.

Sillik, you do NOT seek, only the most correct behavior for anything - you only rationalize depraved enslavement. We are all NOT of social element — WE ARE all of individual elements. Can you please draw or take a picture (maybe through a microscope) of a social element (-; you know, something scientific;-). Is it your godhood position (or another god) that will place each person within humankind's most productive precise order?

Sillik, the entirety of all your religious word salads are out side of, and antithetical to nature's law and science

Sillik, it is a lie that you abhor murder, mayhem and violence in general. Socialism is a powerfully religious vehicle to those very ends. The Hitlers, Stalins, Maos, Pol Pots, etc. simply place their own personal degeneracy to the socialist's religious vehicle. At its core, socialism is the controlling enslavement that allows religious ideologies such as yours to rationalize reinvention of depravities, poverty, pain and otherwise enslavement of the masses. 

Sillik, your here lie is beyond laughable and is nothing more than a religious off topic / misdirection to disguise you desired enslavement of the noble specie.

Sillik, that is a lie based in religion.

Sillik, your a shallow idiot thinking off topic / misdirection religious babble helps your word salad — it does NOT ! ! !  It doesn't matter what you do from a socialist base, it won't work. Attila the Hun didn't necessarily participate in a socialistic endeavor. Marx, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Castro, Pol Pot, etc., etc., etc. all practiced differing forms of socialism with the same end result.

Archer, well said thank you, Sillik's religious dogma and canon can not accept truth or things the way they are; SO, your information here will go to educate not the religious zealot but rather, the true at heart.

The first duty? to get away with it?  hmmm, I don't think so. Prior to getting away with it, it would at least include a duty of propaganda.

Bruce, a starting point to the conversation might start at: “The Congress shall have Power ⋯ To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof ⋯ and fix the Standards of Weights and Measures;” (Article I, Section 8, Clause 5:) “No State shall ⋯ Coin money ⋯ Make anything but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts ⋯;” (Article I Section 10 Clause 1)

Sillik, how many times have I exposed your childish changing of topics (incapable of staying on point). The topic here is "demonizing those who produce." By your misdirection you are saying that the conventional arrangement of drugs and sex are productive by your demonizing such. I really do feel sorry for you; you really need to get help (-; maybe even some drug therapy ;-).

🤣 Archer, I smile 😁  YES ! ! !

Sillik, you neither subscribe to science nor law; while, your personally erroneous dictionary for mentally ill dupes has once again, absolutely nothing to do with reality. Religion is: a sacrosanct object of conscience (an ethic(s), a moral(s), a value or principle (system) or an orientation of correctness / enlightenment) believed sufficiently conventional as to enable an attributable action. Religion is extraneous to the immediate absolute of nature’s law (sometimes in harmony — other times, no). Religion’s initiating tenets of conscience, through fruition of action, encompasses self-obligated pursuits, imperative practices and devoted interests separate / apart from nature’s law. Legally, Religion is: “ real piety in practice, consisting in the performance of all known duties to ⋯ our fellow men.” (Bouviers Law Dictionary); Otherwise, Religion is: a) any specific system of belief and worship, often involving a code of ethics and a philosophy [the Christian religion, the Buddhist religion, etc.] b) any system of beliefs, practices, ethical values, etc. resembling, suggestive of, or likened to such a system [humanism as a religion] ⋯ any object of conscientious regard and pursuit.” (Webster's New World Dictionary - Fourth College Edition); AND, from Joseph Goebbels’ Diary (a very knowledgeable and capable definer of words) “⋯ Socialism is a religion. All we lack is a religious genius capable of uprooting outmoded religious practices and putting new ones in their place. We lack traditions and ritual. One day soon National Socialism will be the religion of all Germans. My Party is my church, and I believe I serve the Lord best if I do his will, and liberate my oppressed people from the fetters of slavery. That is my gospel.” Sillik, you are very religious.

Sillik, again your personal dictionary for mentally ill dupes fails you. Your socialist religion is text book correct with your picture next to religion's definition. Principled? — how religious of you.

Sillik, it is so, SO very sad that you are SO extremely void of any substance. You are so void of substance that you can NOT even recognize the freedom within. By example: your personal dictionary for mentally ill dupes, that has to redefine everyday terms to fit your sick religion's dogma can NOT even come close to real meanings. I have given legal, regular and other dictionaries definition of freedom and all say that at nature's law, freedom is inalienable and NOT a given or earned privilege. Are you the god, or is there another that gives earned privileges?

Sillik. Your empty religion is full of substantiveless / mean nothing word salads. For example: please define: "fair distribution of resources" in depth through nature's law and science methodology.

Sillik, it is sadly obvious how shallow your religion leaves you. Your lack of substance and truth obstruct a knowledge of basic history, science, facts, law and spiritual actuality.

Sillik, 🤪 hahaha / lolololol — your religion's dogma has nothing to support freedom thus, you have to put it down and say it doesn't exist. My heart goes out to you. It is so sad that you have no substance and truth in your deranged word salad(s). I feel sorry for you.

Waffler, your above stated question is a word salad illuminating your blatant bigotry, need to enslave and absolute ignorance in the definitions of freedom, liberty and inalienable rights at nature's law.

WOW ! ! ! Waffler, all the times you have argued against government being "only an ethereal concept, alien to and outside of us. Many see it as some kind of sci-fi being with a life and ability to grow on its own." makes your comment here almost jaw dropping. I smile at the rest of your backing up here.

😁

The occupying statist theocracy infesting this land does not adhere to or, even consider the original Constitution (or the founding principles thereof) - nor, the "law" that separated the de jure States united from its colonizer - nor, do the 4 branches of government (executive, legislative, judicial, media) fit into the bifurcation of Machiavelli's here observation.

Sillik, your religious diatribe conflicts with law, science, the real sane world and your earlier statements. To “OWE” another anything (an individual / a collective / etc.) is because of an express agreement has occurred with a specified sum obligated to pay by a certain date. Even if the agreement is tacit, implied by or inferred from actions or statements, please cite the source for your insanity definition. It appears that your definition must be coming from your personal dictionary for mentally ill dupes. AND, how about that definition of freedom of yours? Since you’ve stated that there is no freedom in your socialist religion, I guess you have double downed on that - because there is no freedom, there isn’t even a freedom to be insane. (hahaha / lololol / 🤪 🤪 🤪; insanity {anything contrary to your godly state}, being outside freedom seems to be a criminal act within your religion’s canons). Reality does NOT support your ecclesiastical diatribe, that being: confinement is a responsibility and, slavery is a challenging contentment.

🤪🥳

Fuller here was mildly accurate. To hold that Congress has general police powers is an absolute misinterpretation of the Constitution and the original Bill of Rights' 9th and 10th Amendments; and, an enslaving usurpation of nature's law.

The list of "right" usage is a good start BUT ultimately, it still usurps and limits the right.