On Philosophical Consistency

Because my liberty is so important to me, yours is equally important. If I decide that it is in society’s best interests to impose a duty on you, then I have conceded that if someone else decides that it is in society’s best interest to impose a duty on me, no matter the duty, I have no logical recourse, as I would then be a hypocrite. So it does not matter if I think that society would be better served if money was taken from one and given to another. Merely by advocating that behavior I have now sanctioned any other person’s belief that force is an acceptable means of accomplishing their desires, no matter what those desires may be. So at that point, I can contend that the desires themselves are wrong, but I cannot contend that using force to enact those desires is wrong, because I have already conceded that using force to accomplish my desires is right. Do you see the can of worms this approach opens?