The State (government) is more evil than good.

The State is evil because it censors information. Only approved Video Games are allowed, only approved TV is allowed, even on private cable TV. The State censors radio, it even censors the Internet in some cases. This is a blatant denial of the Right to Free Press, and the Right to Information, and makes it that much harder for the State to be held accountable. It is therefore morally wrong and evil. The State is evil because it is easy to empower, but much harder to get rid of. Sure, in SOME countries you can vote, but even that does not fundamentally change the system. When the State shows its true colors, it is very difficult if not impossible to get rid of. This infringes on the Right to freedom of choice and is therefore morally wrong and evil. The State is evil because it cannot be held responsible for it's actions by the people it governs. The only way it is held accountable is if another government gets involved, which is also evil because if infringes on the other governments citizens Right to choose and is not acting in the best interests of the other governments people. This makes it morally wrong and evil. The State is evil because it extends its grip beyond protecting the rights of it's people, like the Right to Life by prosecuting murderers, or the Right to Consent, by prosecuting rapists and pedophiles. It focuses on prosecuting people for controversial things, like doing non-government approved drugs, or strange sexual practices (BDSM, homosexuality, bestiality, etc. ), or even on how people eat. The State is acting as a middle man for people who don't like another's lifestyle to impose their will upon them. This is denial of Freedom of Choice, making it morally wrong and therefore evil. Time for RebuttalsP1: Taxes Con assumes that taxes are only spent on the holistic causes of healthcare and welfare. This is a baseless and fraudulent assumption. If it is truly spent on taking care of the needy, why doesn't the government force you to donate directly to poor people? Why would it have to be the middle man at all? In reality, your money is spent however the government pleases. In the best case scenario, people have a choice over who makes the decisions, but not over what those decisions will ultimately be. When taxes aren't enough, the government borrows money, and uses taxes to pay it back. To obtain said taxes, the government holds people at gunpoint and threatens to lock them in a cage, which increases the burden on more taxpayers. This is essentially saying “Pay back the money that I borrowed, or I'll lock you up in a cage like an animal and spend my other victim's money to keep you there”. This takes away Right to Property, and Harms Society by increasing the burden on more taxpayers to keep them locked up while at the same time taking away productive members of society. This is morally wrong and therefore evil. Even when money isn't borrowed, it is not ever solely spent on the welfare of society. If this were true, why isn't world poverty eliminated yet? It would take about $175 billion per year over a twenty-year period to end extreme poverty globally {1}, and the U. S alone spends $600 billion on defense each year. However, the burden should not and does not rest solely on the US. Even with the combined tax revenue of all of the countries in the world, extreme world poverty still exists This is physically Harmful and Life Threatening to many starving people around the world and is thus morally wrong and evil. As for Con's argument for Norway and Sweden, I would like to point out that the income tax rate for an individual in Norway is 47.8%, and that's after the payroll tax, the maximum of which is 14.1%. Add them together, the most tax a working citizen can pay is 61.9%, the minimum is 47.8%. Then there's the sales tax, which is 8% on transportation, 14% on food and drinks, and 25% on everything else! As for Sweden, it's even worse there. The income tax is 57%, which is after a 31.42% payroll tax! .Put them together, and the effective tax rate is 88.42%. The sales tax is 25%, 12%, or 6%. This means that most of the time, taxes are actually higher than the income earned! Note that these tax rates don't even consider property taxes. This information is all from source {2}. These turn the middle class poor and give the poor all of the free benefits, which means that the poor turn middle class and the middle class keep barely any of the money earned. Using force to make one group of people suffer while the other prospers is morally wrong and therefore evil. In response to Con's “Live as a Hermit” argument, I would like to note that many people do not trade or barter anymore. In fact, even paper currency is becoming less and less used. Why should an individual be forced to stop using currency and give up the goods and services that can only be obtained through currency or special skill-sets (glass, windows, surgery, firearms, metal, butchered meat, etc. ) just because he/she does not pay taxes. If living as a Hermit or being a freeloader is the only way to avoid taxes, this makes the state evil. This is basically the same as holding someone at gunpoint and telling them to pay taxes. It is still morally wrong and evil. P2 Education I concede that flat-earth theory, Creationism, and antebellum South are not viable education options. However, all across the world, state-regulations always go beyond that. In history, I was taught that Sally Ride was the first woman in space. This is a lie, because the first woman in space was actually a Russian women named Valentina Vladimirovna Tereshkova. In science, they only teach the Big Bang theory. Although they do say that it's just a theory, they do not give any alternatives, and I'm not just talking about Creationism. I'm talking about the multiverse theory, M-theory, the cycle theory, all of which are alternatives to the big bang theory. In history, they say the U. S acquired Florida from Spain peacefully, even though we already had troops stationed in Florida ready to invade. They also teach that the Mexican-American war was justified, even though James K. Polk wanted it from the beginning of his term. This is denial of the Right to Information , harms Society by misinforming our children and is thus morally wrong and evil. They teach to obey authority and not question decisions. They teach that you must obey or be punished (detention, Lunch D-hall, etc. ). They say that it's to prepare you for the real world, even though that world is only the way it is because of the State. I find it laughable when you say that I benefit from the values and morals kids learn in school when violent crime is still going on even though schools have been around for centuries. Regardless, the State still uses violence to obtain the funds for this “education” (see P1), so it is still morally wrong. P3 War Half of your argument is irrelevant because while some States do not fight wars, a lot of them do. Tell me, how would an organized war be fought without some form of Government? As for the “War with a just cause” argument, the cause is not in favor of the people that the government was formed to serve. The government's military was formed to protect it's own people, not somebody else's. Need I remind you of World War 2? Millions of people died. This takes away Life, harms many Societies, Injures countless others, and took away Rights (think rations). This is morally wrong and therefore evil. Your entire argument about war easily refuted. Conclusion: The State is still more evil than good, and more morally wrong than right. I look forward to your reply. Sources . http://www.visionofearth.org... . http://en.wikipedia.org... . http://www.enchantedlearning.com...