Comments Elsewhere

Jaime:

One can refuse, and no one ever said otherwise. There is an imposed condition that results from not agreeing, but no one has taken away your right to refuse the law.

The “imposed condition” being what, exactly?

If it’s something like what is done to undocumented immigrants today (arrest, confinement, and exile), then I should like to know by what right you think that you (or some third party) can impose this condition on me. You seem to want to treat this as if it were a matter of a contractual quid pro quo — I either agree or don’t agree to attend your class, and in return you agree to give me something that I want. But the peaceful enjoyment of my own life, liberty, and property are not goods in your possession that you can legitimately agree or decline to turn over to me. They are things that you owe me whenever and wherever we happen to interact (just as I owe you the same respect for your rights), prior to any agreements, contracts, covenants, or pledges we may or may not have made. I never agreed to take the class you propose forcing me to take, and I never agreed to accept anything from you that you made (or had any right to make) conditional on taking it. So what right would you have to make me take it, or to use any force against me as retribution for refusing to take it?

If it’s some other penalty that you have in mind, one not involving the use of force against my person or my property, then maybe you could clarify what you mean to do to people who refuse to attend the class.