RE: Above the law? Does the law even apply? What's the evidence?
When you're born, you're not born a free man. If as a baby you had the skills to care for yourself, provide the same value to society that you required to survive, or means to survive on your own, you could be free. But nobody is born with that capability. They require parents to care for them. Society to protect them from those that might harm them. Schools to educate them. This is the debt every man is born with.
Your subjugation to society is merely to pay off this debt. It's provided you free of charge, 18 years of care and development. Now all you are required to do is not hurt others, follow a few silly laws, and pay a portion of your income in taxes.
And you're not even bound to any particular society! If you wish, you could live until you can afford a boat, then sail off into the ocean and care for yourself, paying no taxes, avoiding all interaction, and being bound to no sovereign law.
It's unfortunate that nearly all the places that have no law are waterbound. But such is the case when you live on a limited resources planet - the land is already claimed. Any unclaimed resource is yours for the taking. But claimed ones are off limits, to take them without providing mutually agreed compensation is to hurt another, and above even the natural law.
When you say "society", which individuals are you specifically referring to? What evidence do you have that I owe these individuals money? Do you have proof of services rendered that weren't paid for? How does being raised by my parents (who paid for my upbringing) mean I owe money to third parties? How is it possible to be born into debt given that debts can only be incurred through consensual contract? By your logic, wouldn't it be okay to take out mortgages on behalf of your unborn kids?
Why would I have to sail off into the ocean in order to not submit to theft? You realize that you're not my dad and that I don't live in your house, right?
Are you saying that it wouldn't matter which goods or services I provide to enrich the lives of others; that it's not a contribution unless I also submit to the theft of taxation?
How does any of this conjecture constitute evidence that the constitution applies to me?
"Your parents raised you therefore the constitution applies" would be a non-sequitur, but I can understand why you felt the need to engage in story telling.
So, you mean people are born as slaves, and with the obligation to obey their ruler's arbitrary demands. And that is the natural law? Please tell me with what kind of magic, some of the born slaves become masters and slave owners, being born as defenseless and dependent as everyone else?
![5 questions] (http://imgur.com/a/S918O)
I wouldn't say slaves is the right word for it. But we have the moral obligation to pass onto the future society what society has done to benefit us. Any other action is immoral selfishness. And true, there is unfairness in how the power is arranged. We ought to work together to fix that. But you would see, if you actually lived in a land without law, there is even more unfairness without the law.
Let me answer those questions:
Yes. If someone commits harm upon a group, the individuals do not have the moral right to vigilante retribution. But the group itself has the moral right to protect every member.
Not so much the "right" to do things they wouldn't do, but the obligation. They act as a delegate of the group, and they are obligated to work in the best interests and direction of the group instead of their own.
I wouldn't say an act is transformed. Morality is not absolute. The "same" act in different circumstances has different moralities. Obeying the consensus of society is a circumstance where your actions are usually (but not always) moral. For instance, stealing to feed your family is different from stealing to obtain as much wealth as possible. Even slight differences make a difference: if you stole luxury foods to feed your family when it was possible to steal mundane foods, that is different from stealing the cheapest items you need.
Yes, if they do anything immoral while a delegate of society, they are just as culpable as if they did it as an individual.
If a delegate is ordered to to something he finds morally wrong, he is obligated to step down from his position. He is also morally obligated to try to change society so that his successor does not commit the same wrongs.
Wait a minute, why is it the responsibility of anyone to take care of a child other than that child's parents? Why is it my responsibility to take care of my neighbor's child simply because they decided to have intercourse. This is not to say that I won't help as i see it necessary, but this is not something that either is nor should be required of me. Why must I be held accountable for the actions of other people?