A Critique of Rothbardian Natural Rights (sorta long)

[Dan.]

[ QUOTE ]
You seriously can't see the difference between shinning a laser beam at someones house and lighting a candle in your house?

It is not the act of emitting light that is the problem it is the damage to the person's property that needs to be protected. Lighting a candle does no damage to your property. A high powered laser beam that destroys your house is obviously coercive and should not be allowed. The article is full of poor analogies like this that aren't really a critique of property rights.

[/ QUOTE ]

The two only differ in degree. If rights are absolute, either both are allowed or both are outlawed. The author then asks--and you seem to know the answer--where is the line drawn?