InDefinition.com

FAIR Trial           Some people give voluntary donations to strangers  and tax collectors.  Other people are forced  or intimidated to release valuables to strangers and tax collectors.  Yet the word  “FAIR”  is the all-purpose word to describe both gifts and robbery.  If you do not agree that a tax is Fair,  notify the tax collector that you prefer to withhold the  Eleemosynary contribution.      The goal of satisfactory legal prodeedings is to resolve dispute of  accusation and denial,  by means of a  Just Trial. If the accuser and the accused are able to agree,  the formality of a trial can be avoided by a  plea bargain.      The  “right to a fair trial”  is specified in the Wikipedia encyclopedia definition.  I assert that persons who attend a  “FAIR”  are participating in a  Fair Trial— negotiating for agreement with other person(s) -  to trade.  They do not resolve disagreements,  they leave  and pursue other opportunities.  Imagine that a  buyer attempts to negotiate agreement with a seller ?  They disagree about the exchange.  The  “Buyer”  seizes the desired item(s),  and enforces his verdict against the disagreeable seller.  Other people haggle,  fail to achieve agreement,  and walk away.  But  THIS  “Buyer”  is the  Tax Collector,  who is legally authorized to collect the  “Fair Tax”,  despite the howling protests of the  “Seller”. The enforced verdict  of the Legal Trial,  is as  “FAIR”  as the  enforced verdict of the  Tax Collector. Perhaps a buyer offers ten dollars for an item.  The seller asks for twelve dollars.  The  “Buyer”  leaves ten dollars on the counter,  and runs away with the item.  The Seller attempts to stop the  “Buyer”  from taking the item !  The  “Buyer”  enforces HIS Verdict.  Legal Status  is the  only difference between the  “Buyer”  or the  Tax Collector. Ludwig von Mises observed that:  The Hotel,  and the Jail -  have beds,  serve meals,  and provide lodging.  The similarity of their activities  does not confuse the citizens.  Perhaps the Hotel operator could encourage citizens to support a legal charter to authorize  Press Gangs,  to increase patronage,  and allocate tax funding  to pay Hotel expenses ?  Many  Chamber Of Commerce  subsidies are justified by similar comparisons. The trial is a gathering of adversaries,  who are not able to agree.  Of course it is  “FAIR”  when the accuser (prosecutor)  and the accused are able to agree.  But this is not a trial -  where witnesses and evidence are presented to demonstrate that the accused person is not truthful when pleading “Not Guilty”,  and denying the accusations.      The trial is a gathering of people who are NOT able to agree.  The “FAIR”  is a gathering of people for the purpose of negotiating agreements.  They are motivated to create agreements and gain the benefits of trading to exchange things (and services).  Division of labor and specialized skills are advantages which explain peaceful,  civilized,  social interaction.  Trials and Government Enforcement (Taxation)  are necessary because not everyone is pleasant and virtuous.  Taxation is enforced to provide the means to employ enforcement agents to maintain peaceful realtions.  Government is the social institution which protects the Cause-Effect relations of producing values - and owning these products.  Criminals exert force (or threat of force)  to separate the producer/cause from the product/effect.  This Law of cause-effect is protected by a lawful Government.  Justice is the goal of law enforcement.  Just Government activity is applied to protect the human ability to choose,  and to relate with other people by peaceful,  voluntary agreements.  Lawful enforcement protects the ability to disagree,  without being overpowered by those who make offers that they dare you to refuse.  Thugs and “FAIR TAX” promoters counterfeit the definition of  “AGREEMENT”  when they claim that “Majority Rules”.  Three thugs outnumber two victims.  They claim  it is  “FAIR” to  “Vote” on who will “agree to donate” their valuables to the majority “Voters”.  Those who are unable to think for themselves,  must obey what they are told.      The primary context of meaning of the words: “Society”  and  “Civilization”  is the non-violent relations between people.  Civilized is contrasted with Barbaric conflict.  This article in the May issue of The Freeman,  illustrates how the Untied Supreme Court  is blind to that distinction. February 28, 2006 Today  the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling that could add to the increasing difficulty  women face in obtaining reproductive health services.  If the Court's  8-0 decision in Scheidler, et al.,  v. National Organization for Women (NOW), et al.  and Operation Rescue v. NOW, et al.  ushers in a return to clinic violence in the United States,  NOW  stands ready to fight in every jurisdiction.  For two decades,  NOW has pursued every legal strategy,  including three Supreme Court cases,  to stave off the violent attacks that gripped this country  from the mid-1980s  to the mid-1990s.  This case,  brought under the  Racketeer-Influenced and Corrupt Organizations  (RICO) Act,  was one of the most successful  long-term strategies.  The federal jury found unanimously  that these defendants  had engaged in a  nationwide criminal enterprise  to close women's health clinics through extortion,  violence  and threats of violence,  and specified over a hundred acts  in furtherance of their efforts. This case was never about protests or pickets— it was about violence and extortion.  But without strong protections against clinic assaults,  the legal right to abortion could become meaningless.  If women are too terrified  to walk into clinics  and healthcare providers  are too terrified  to keep their doors open,  then we will have lost the fight for reproductive freedom  even with Roe v. Wade still on the books. Joseph Scheidler,  Randall Terry  and other leaders of the self-described  “pro-life mafia”  had vowed to stop abortion  “by any means necessary,”  and the ensuing attacks  included arson,  bombings,  violent blockades,  death threats  and even murder.  By vacating the injunction  on narrow,  technical grounds,  the Supreme Court  sided today with thugs and bullies,  not peaceful protesters. Rule of Law:  Isonomia FAIR TAX Biased  “Definitions” Isonomia.US Ipseity