Many people who use the arguments mentioned would have different philosophical reasons for believing the claims. The Christian groups that claim abortion/euthansia is murder would appeal to it being wrong because only God has a right to kill, and the libertarians who argue that taxation is theft would appeal to the right to property. Both would refuse to argue on utilitarian grounds.
God has a right to kill, and the libertarians who argue that taxation is theft would appeal to the right to property. Both would refuse to argue on utilitarian grounds.
The libertarians I have read have all argued that people would in general be better off if libertarian principles were practised more. That is, they argue solely on utilitarian grounds.
I’ve seen one or both arguments. The most obvious example would be Ayn Rand who made essentially both arguments. Essentially this looks like a form of belief overkill or political mindkilling. People throughout the political spectrum are convinced often that what they consider the most morally correct course of action is also the most pragmatically correct one (a different example would be how with the recent heathcare fight in the US almost everyone who thought the bill was bad economically also thought it was unconstitutional and people who thought that it was a good idea were more likely to claim it was constitutional). They don’t seem to realize or care that the universe is ideologically blind.
What’s more common is people rallying others to anti-tax with emotional statements encouraging entitlement. These are not thoughtful ones we are talking about.
Many people who use the arguments mentioned would have different philosophical reasons for believing the claims. The Christian groups that claim abortion/euthansia is murder would appeal to it being wrong because only God has a right to kill, and the libertarians who argue that taxation is theft would appeal to the right to property. Both would refuse to argue on utilitarian grounds.
The libertarians I have read have all argued that people would in general be better off if libertarian principles were practised more. That is, they argue solely on utilitarian grounds.
I’ve seen one or both arguments. The most obvious example would be Ayn Rand who made essentially both arguments. Essentially this looks like a form of belief overkill or political mindkilling. People throughout the political spectrum are convinced often that what they consider the most morally correct course of action is also the most pragmatically correct one (a different example would be how with the recent heathcare fight in the US almost everyone who thought the bill was bad economically also thought it was unconstitutional and people who thought that it was a good idea were more likely to claim it was constitutional). They don’t seem to realize or care that the universe is ideologically blind.
Surely some of them argue from natural rights too, some of the time?
That is quite possible. I have only read a small number of libertarians.
ETA: None of which are Ayn Rand.
What’s more common is people rallying others to anti-tax with emotional statements encouraging entitlement. These are not thoughtful ones we are talking about.