That's what George Anyman said.

If you honestly believe it is morally right for a 50 some year old coach to have sexual relationships with 10 and 12 year old boys behind the back of the parents, you are seriously lol.

Mr. Anyman obviously acted immorally and violated the kids and parents rights, and market justice would not be immoral imo.

OK, so how about this scenario.

90% of people in certain geographical area decide that they want to hire a company that will collect 1000$ from every person each month, and spend that money for certain things (roads, canalization, schools). Now, those people think its immoral to let the other 10% not pay, so they pay a company to imprison those people who refuse to pay.

What would happen in this situation? To me it appears that those 10% cant really do nothing, because no company would want to (or be able) to protect them against the company backed up by 90% of people.

I am STILL waiting for a definition of "market justice."

If it had been a private drone that killed Anwar al-Awlaki, would that have been OK?

Again, fu and your morals, fu and your market, fu and your opinion. The parents, the children, the market, and especially you, have no jurisdiction over Mr. Anyone. You're trying to enforce a universal moral code (which is obviously not universal) on Mr. Anybody, and your trying to do so via violence. In other words, you are the government (congratulations btw, I knew you would come around).

Also, the parents have no "rights" when it comes to their kids. Kids are individual human beings and it is a violation of NAP for parents to try to control them (unless you believe kids are property).

If a company is imprisoning people and stealing from them immorally, they're going to go out of business eventually. They will not last. Competition will drive them out, and geography will not prevent it in this day and age.

What ever we propose that the victims choose.


Not if he didn't violate anyone's rights and the NAP.

Why do the victims get to choose?

Can a 10 year old make mature, safe decisions regarding sex with a 50 year old? Can they really keep themselves from being taken advantage of? Parents obviously don't own their kids like property, but parents have a legitimate role in the upbringing of their child, and not one of these parents had the idea of a 50 yo taking advantage of their children and ****ing them.

If you were in Anyman's position would you do what he did? Is it morally right for a coach to have sex with 10 yo kids behind their parents and communities backs?

Did you forget that 90% of people support them, and dont consider their activity as immoral? They also don't call it stealing. Only the unfortunate 10% are pissed of by what they consider violent theft (the same way that only 10% are against the violence against pedophile).

Cause they're the victims and the customers.

LOL this really is like a damn religion to you, isn't it?

This is clearly wrong. Children are either people or they are property. If they are people, then NAP applies to them, even wrt their parents. If the child chooses to have a relationship with Mr. Anyman then there isn't a damn thing the parents can do about it.

Once again, you are trying to enforce your morals on Mr. Anyman. Universal morality doesn't exist, and it sure as hell doesn't apply in your AC fantasy land. Also, your "universal morality" doesn't even have historical standing. Your trying to impose a recently made up social construct on another person because you don't think it's right.

gj being the government.

Aahhh Lirva, you should probably read what your brother Rothbard has to say about children.

YOU said there is no official age of consent, so the answer is yes.