Can anything be stupider than that a man has the right to kill me because he lives on the other side of a river and his ruler has a quarrel with mine, though I have not quarrelled with him?

"It seems somewhat illogical to say, "You have violated God's commandment 'Thou shalt not kill,' so therefore I will kill you.

Nothing can be more absurd, in pure speculation, than an hereditary right in any mortal to govern other men: and yet, in practice, nothing can be more absurd than to have a king to choose at every vacancy of a throne. We draw at a lottery indeed in one case, where there are many chances to lose, and few to gain. But have we much more advantage of this kind in the other? I think not. Upon these, and upon most occasions, the multitude would do at least as well to trust to chance as choice, and to their fortune as to their judgment.

You can kill a man but you cant kill a idea.

You can imprison a man, but not an idea. You can exile a man, but not an idea. You can kill a man, but not an idea.

There is a certain right by which we many deprive a man of life, but none by which we may deprive him of death; this is mere cruelty.

You can kill me, but you can't make me obey.

The right of a nation to kill a tyrant in case of necessity can no more be doubted than to hang a robber, or kill a flea.

I can’t fight over a man. If I’m in a relationship, and the guy wants to quit, he can. If there’s a fight, then it should be between me and him, and not myself and the other chick.

Ladies and gentlemen, I came here to avoid as much as possible treading on your corns. I had intended to deal only with the basic issue of economics that dictates our lives from the cradle to the grave, regardless of our religion or moral beliefs. I see now that it was a mistake. If one enters a battle, he cannot be squeamish about a few corns. Here, then, are my answers: I do not believe in God, because I believe in man. Whatever his mistakes, man has for thousands of years past been working to undo the botched job your God has made. As to killing rulers, it depends entirely on the position of the ruler. If it is the Russian Czar, I most certainly believe in dispatching him to where he belongs. If the ruler is as ineffectual as an American President, it is hardly worth the effort. There are, however, some potentates I would kill by any and all means at my disposal. They are Ignorance, Superstition, and Bigotry — the most sinister and tyrannical rulers on earth. As for the gentleman who asked if free love would not build more houses of prostitution, my answer is: They will all be empty if the men of the future look like him.

Does any man have the right to dispose of his own life? This is the ultimate question of moral entitlement, and relevant only if right is relevant in this context, and it is not. A suicidal man cannot be concerned - and nor should he be - with questions of moral entitlement.

I dedicate this lecture to showing what ridiculous conclusions and rare statements such a man as myself can make. I wish, therefore, to destroy any image of authority that has previously been generated.

Can anything be more ridiculous than one dead person mourning for another?

No hay derecho a matar al enemigo sino en el caso de no poderle hacer esclavo. Luego, el derecho de hacerle esclavo no viene del derecho de matarle. Por lo tanto, es un cambio inicuo hacerle comprar a costa de su libertad una vida sobre la cual nadie tiene derecho.