or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Suck it, haters.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Suck it, haters. - Page 4

post #121 of 202
I hope to hit my head hard enough and drink enough to spend my whole day reasoning in inforgraphics. So many psuedo-tidbits of information. So little real reasoning. I'm certain if my liver holds out and if I fracture my skull enough, I can get there.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #122 of 202
I guess some people believe infographics are a trump card. No pun intended.

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply

Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

(I prefer the tumult of liberty to the quiet of servitude.)

Reply
post #123 of 202
Thread Starter 
Those were biblical marriages. Feel free to keep putting your head in the sand, though. Marriage between one man and one woman based on love and procreation does not in any way represent the full history of marriage worldwide. Stop trying to legislate your religion in its current form (that ignores its past and its own holy book).

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #124 of 202
Quote:
So, let's deny people their love and happiness because the taxes are complicated. Gotta love that reasoning.

I was being facetious, dumb ass.

Quote:
Hey look, SDW wants separate but equal, too! Yeah, interracial marriage is soooooooo different.

I've already explained why and how it is different.

Quote:

Judeochristians do not have a monopoly on the word marriage. It has meant many things to many different cultures for centuries and centuries. Hell, even your stupid bible explains 8 different kinds of marriages.

Bullshit. It's meant the same thing in the majority of Western cultures for hundreds if not thousands of years. It's meant the same thing in this nation since its existence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Those were biblical marriages. Feel free to keep putting your head in the sand, though. Marriage between one man and one woman based on love and procreation does not in any way represent the full history of marriage worldwide. Stop trying to legislate your religion in its current form (that ignores its past and its own holy book).

My position is not based on the bible.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #125 of 202
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I was being facetious, dumb ass.

Reported. I'll get to the other nonsense later.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #126 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Reported. I'll get to the other nonsense later.

haha. You post all kinds of hateful things, and the second someone calls you a name you run off and report it. Crybaby.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #127 of 202
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001

Crybaby.

More personal attacks?

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #128 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

More personal attacks?

He's not attacking you. He's attacking your hypocrisy and lack of reasoning. My advice would be for him to put it in the thread I've created for that purpose though.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #129 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

He's not attacking you. He's attacking your hypocrisy and lack of reasoning. My advice would be for him to put it in the thread I've created for that purpose though.

Excellent suggestion. Will do.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #130 of 202
Thread Starter 

Maine passes marriage equality.

Washington passes marriage equality.

Maryland passes marriage equality.

Minnesota denies a bigotry amendment.

 

If this upsets you, you are part of an ever-dwindling population on the wrong side of history.  It's not too late to acknowledge your bigotry and join the equal rights party.  I'll save seats for you.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #131 of 202

Those states have done it the right way and congrats to them.

 

Doing it the wrong way is having a judge tell you that you cannot amend your own constitution and other forms of absurd reasoning.

 

So I'm glad those states have found the votes to make the change. I'm hoping the stupid legal reasoning that tried to bring this about in states like California doesn't stick around and cause more harm than good.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #132 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Maine passes marriage equality.
Washington passes marriage equality.
Maryland passes marriage equality.
Minnesota denies a bigotry amendment.

If this upsets you, you are part of an ever-dwindling population on the wrong side of history.  It's not too late to acknowledge your bigotry and join the equal rights party.  I'll save seats for you.

Exactly.

I find it hilarious that people like Newt Gingritch, who has a certain "history" with marriage, declare that same sex marriage will ruin the institution of marriage. Right.

Quite to the contrary, I believe same sex marriage will strengthen marriage, as it redeclares that marriage is an act out of love, and not out of duty. Even heterosexual marriage will gain from this.
Edited by tonton - 11/7/12 at 8:39pm
post #133 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Those states have done it the right way and congrats to them.

Doing it the wrong way is having a judge tell you that you cannot amend your own constitution and other forms of absurd reasoning.

So I'm glad those states have found the votes to make the change. I'm hoping the stupid legal reasoning that tried to bring this about in states like California doesn't stick around and cause more harm than good.

I'm absolutely sure the people of Oklahoma or Kentucky would vote to outlaw interracial marriage if put to a vote. Should they have that right? Please explain again why same sex marriage is any different, without reverting to the "definition of marriage" bullshit argument.

And I assume you would as vehemently oppose DOMA and other national anti-marriage measures as strongly as you would oppose a "Roe" style legalization?
Edited by tonton - 11/7/12 at 8:36pm
post #134 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Quite to the contrary, I believe same sex marriage will strengthen marriage, as it redeclares that marriage is an act out of love, and not out of duty. Even heterosexual marriage will gain from this.

 

Yes, so when you don't feel the love anymore, you simply walk away.

 

SSM is just a further consumering of marriage, by a society that has broken down so much it values personal greed and consumerism above all else.

The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #135 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

More personal attacks?

He's not attacking you. He's attacking your hypocrisy and lack of reasoning. My advice would be for him to put it in the thread I've created for that purpose though.

He called him a name. Not his reasoning. That was personal. There's no spinning that.1oyvey.gif

Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
Without the need for difference or a need to always follow the herd breeds complacency, mediocrity, and a lack of imagination
Reply
post #136 of 202
Thread Starter 

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/mexican-court-rules-favor-sex-marriage-17890707#.UMD2zWjEPwx

 

Good news everyone!  Mexico is well on its way toward marriage equality after a tribunal in Oaxaca struck down a ban on same-sex marriage.  

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #137 of 202
According to the Mormon Church, being gay is not a choice. Only acting gay is. So of course, they're suggesting we go against the natural feelings given to us by God.

Talk about a semantic move of political convenience!

Even HP has fallen for the spin, apparently.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2012/12/06/mormon-church-calls-for-more-compassion-towards-gays-homosexuality-not-a-choice_n_2252874.html?icid=hp_front_top_art
post #138 of 202
post #139 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Big news in the coming months...

 

Prop 8 and DOMA are both up for USSC review.

 

https://secure3.convio.net/hrc/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=1509&autologin=true&utm_term=footer_link&JServSessionIdr004=4lwwi2946h.app306a

 

I'll probably blow your mind here, but: 

 

1.  I think both are likely to be overturned. 

 

2.  I think both probably should be overturned on Equal Protection grounds.  

 

 

That being said, I still don't favor same sex marriage--I prefer civil unions as the solution (even if that means civil unions for hetero couples as well).   My problem is that I think government redefining the institution (which is cultural and religious in nature) could have all sorts of unintended consequences (could churches eventually be sued for discrimination?  Could someone argue for the right to marry more than one person?  On what grounds do we prevent the latter, having already changed the definition once?  Should government be redefining societal/cultural/religious institutions that pre-date its very existence?).   

 

If "marriage" ends up being allowed, I hope that it at least gets done legislatively.  The default position for most states is that marriage is between a man and woman, so it would require a law to change that.  I oppose judges ordering the legislature to make same sex marriage legal.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #140 of 202
Thread Starter 

Is the government redefining it or rather acknowledging that the old cultural norms are outdated and the current laws do not fit the new paradigm?

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #141 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Is the government redefining it or rather acknowledging that the old cultural norms are outdated and the current laws do not fit the new paradigm?

 

Uh, that's the same thing, BR.  And what gives the government the authority to redefine societal institutions that go back millennia?  What about the unintended consequences?  Let me guess...they'll be dismissed with a wave of the hand.  Don't worry, people won't push to marry more than one person.  Don't worry, churches won't be sued for discrimination (and if they are, they deserve it, right?).  These are but minor and hypothetical problems.  Let's just pass this b*** now and worry about it later. 

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #142 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Don't worry, churches won't be sued for discrimination (and if they are, they deserve it, right?).

 

Yeah, this seems to be the point (while it may or may not specifically be about churches.) I've argued that the point of the state giving same-gender couples a permission slip to marry is actually about compelling various others to recognize and accommodate these "marriages."

 

I've stated before that:

 

1) Every consenting adult has a natural right to marry whomever they wish. Period. They have it. No one is stopping them from living together, from arranging their personal financial and property affairs in a way that shares, splits, conveys ownership, etc. however they desire.

 

2) What same-gender couples are looking for are two things: a) A permission slip from the state, and b) the "right" to use that permission slip to compel others to do things they want them to do.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #143 of 202
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

 

Uh, that's the same thing, BR.  And what gives the government the authority to redefine societal institutions that go back millennia? 

 

 

No, it's not.  First, marriage has not been uniform in practice and form worldwide for millennia.  Second, the government isn't redefining anything--the people already have evolved and the government is just recognizing what is the new reality.

 

Quote:
What about the unintended consequences?  Let me guess...they'll be dismissed with a wave of the hand.  Don't worry, people won't push to marry more than one person.

 

 

Why shouldn't they?  They are consenting adults.  Oh, right, you want to deny others rights because you don't like it.

 

Quote:
 Don't worry, churches won't be sued for discrimination (and if they are, they deserve it, right?).  These are but minor and hypothetical problems.  Let's just pass this b*** now and worry about it later. 

 

Churches shouldn't get sued for discrimination.  They can marry whomever they want.  If they do get sued, the cases should be dismissed.  

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #144 of 202
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

Yeah, this seems to be the point (while it may or may not specifically be about churches.) I've argued that the point of the state giving same-gender couples a permission slip to marry is actually about compelling various others to recognize and accommodate these "marriages."

 

I've stated before that:

 

1) Every consenting adult has a natural right to marry whomever they wish. Period. They have it. No one is stopping them from living together, from arranging their personal financial and property affairs in a way that shares, splits, conveys ownership, etc. however they desire.

 

2) What same-gender couples are looking for are two things: a) A permission slip from the state, and b) the "right" to use that permission slip to compel others to do things they want them to do.

You want to allow hospitals to continue denying soon-to-be widows from saying goodbye to their spouses.  That's what's despicable.  You think that's just fine and that it's the hospital's choice.  Well, **** that.  

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #145 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

Yeah, this seems to be the point (while it may or may not specifically be about churches.) I've argued that the point of the state giving same-gender couples a permission slip to marry is actually about compelling various others to recognize and accommodate these "marriages."

 

I've stated before that:

 

1) Every consenting adult has a natural right to marry whomever they wish. Period. They have it. No one is stopping them from living together, from arranging their personal financial and property affairs in a way that shares, splits, conveys ownership, etc. however they desire.

 

I was about to totally agree, but it should be noted that it is easier to accomplish these things with a recognized marriage.  It doesn't apply to things like hospital visitation rights, (I don't think) and taxes, though.  

 

 

 

 

Quote:
2) What same-gender couples are looking for are two things: a) A permission slip from the state, and b) the "right" to use that permission slip to compel others to do things they want them to do.

 

I agree.  This is where I get off the bus with many gay rights advocates.  It has been my experience that they (in general...there are certainly exceptions) want more than just tolerance and equal legal rights.  They want our society to change to the point where being gay is given 100% equal status (socially) to being straight.  This includes teaching young children not just about "non-traditional" families and couples (which is fine and probably a good idea), but that "it's OK to be gay" from a moral perspective.  This is why some people feel that school are, at the behest of the gay rights community, participating in indoctrination.  They are making what some see as moral judgements, which is not the place of the State to say the least.  

I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #146 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

You want to allow hospitals to continue denying soon-to-be widows from saying goodbye to their spouses.  That's what's despicable.  You think that's just fine and that it's the hospital's choice.  Well, **** that.  

 

While I disagree with a hospital denying visitation to whomever a patient wishes visitation, I don't have a right to force anyone else to submit to my own values.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #147 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I agree.  This is where I get off the bus with many gay rights advocates.  It has been my experience that they (in general...there are certainly exceptions) want more than just tolerance and equal legal rights.  They want our society to change to the point where being gay is given 100% equal status (socially) to being straight.  This includes teaching young children not just about "non-traditional" families and couples (which is fine and probably a good idea), but that "it's OK to be gay" from a moral perspective.  This is why some people feel that school are, at the behest of the gay rights community, participating in indoctrination.  They are making what some see as moral judgements, which is not the place of the State to say the least.  

 

Let me try to be more clear. I have no problem with homosexual people (and their supporters) from attempting to make the case and argue for 100% equality and status in all things. The thing I object to is using force to achieve their objectives.

 

Morally speaking, I believe that homosexual behavior and conduct is wrong, and is wrong in the eyes of God. But, again, I don't intend to impose this moral value onto anyone.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #148 of 202
Thread Starter 
Quote:
MJ says:
 
While I disagree with a hospital denying visitation to whomever a patient wishes visitation, I don't have a right to force anyone else to submit to my own values.

 

 

So, in other words, a hospital's freedom to be a giant dick is more important than a spouse's freedom to say goodbye.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #149 of 202
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

Let me try to be more clear. I have no problem with homosexual people (and their supporters) from attempting to make the case and argue for 100% equality and status in all things. The thing I object to is using force to achieve their objectives.

 

Morally speaking, I believe that homosexual behavior and conduct is wrong, and is wrong in the eyes of God. But, again, I don't intend to impose this moral value onto anyone.

No, but you are totally fine with others (hospitals) imposing their values on homosexuals.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #150 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

So, in other words, a hospital's freedom to be a giant dick is more important than a spouse's freedom to say goodbye.

 

In other words, I don't have a right to stop someone from being a dick. That's part of what freedom requires sometimes...putting up with things we don't like or agree with.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #151 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

No, but you are totally fine with others (hospitals) imposing their values on homosexuals.

 

You are a bit confused. Owners have the right to determine what can or can't be done on their property. It's that simple. While I might not agree with what those rules are, I have no right to dictate what they should be. You clearly want to dictate to others. I don't or, even if I do want to, I chose restrain thus urge.


Edited by MJ1970 - 12/10/12 at 12:50pm

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #152 of 202
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

 

You are a bit confused. Owners have the right to determine what can or can't be done on their property. It's that simple. While I might not agree with what those rules are, I have no right to dictate what they should be. You clearly want to dictate to others. I don't or, even if I do want to, I chose restrain thus urge.

Which is why hospitals should be publicly owned.  You don't always get to determine which hospital you are going to in an emergency situation.  Knowing the management's policy on being heartless assholes ahead of time isn't always feasible--nor is it possible to avoid if they are the only one in network in the area.  Society absolutely does have a right to tell those ignorant twats running the hospital to **** off and be humane.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #153 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Which is why hospitals should be publicly owned.

 

And, indeed, government-owned facilities have no such right.

 

As to whether all such facilities should be government owned, that's a different debate.

 

Tell me, does this reasoning of yours also apply to restaurants? Hotels? Apartment buildings? Etc.? Or only things that require imminent, emergency decision-making?

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

You don't always get to determine which hospital you are going to in an emergency situation.  Knowing the management's policy on being heartless assholes ahead of time isn't always feasible--nor is it possible to avoid if they are the only one in network in the area.  Society absolutely does have a right to tell those ignorant twats running the hospital to **** off and be humane.

 

Society? Who is "society?" Can I write him a letter? Can I go visit with him and have a chat? Buy him a beer?

 

1rolleyes.gif


Edited by MJ1970 - 12/10/12 at 2:27pm

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #154 of 202
Thread Starter 

I know you are being flippant, but it is quite telling that you scoff at the idea of society doing what's going for its people.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #155 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

I know you are being flippant, but it is quite telling that you scoff at the idea of society doing what's going for its people.

 

I'm raising a serious question in a flippant manner. It's a subtle but important distinction.

 

One issue is that you appear to believe that this problem among others) can only be solved in society by the use of force. I believe you're wrong.

 

Ultimately though you seem to be conflating "society" and "state." This is an error.

 

Again there are deeper questions and issues here that you don't really care to discuss, because you'd rather froth at the mouth, dismiss those you disagree with in a profane way and simply dec;are what you think is the ultimately right thing to do as the only thing to do without much regard (if any) for any other factors immediate or long term,


Edited by MJ1970 - 12/10/12 at 3:46pm

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #156 of 202
You believe that private business is more trustworthy than an elected Government. This is scary.
post #157 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

You believe that private business is more trustworthy than an elected Government. This is scary.

 

Actually, not necessarily. You committed a fallacy when you drew that conclusion from what I wrote above.

 

But, generally, yes, I do. And I find it scary that you find the state to be more trustworthy. So there we are. We both see things very differently and neither of us can see how and why the other sees it they way they do. Whodda thunk it?!


Edited by MJ1970 - 12/10/12 at 5:16pm

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #158 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

You believe that private business is more trustworthy than an elected Government. This is scary.

Actually, not necessarily. You committed a fallacy when you drew that conclusion from what I wrote above.

But, generally, yes, I do. And I find it scary that you find the state to be more trustworthy. So there we are. We both see things very differently and neither of us can see how and why the other sees it they way they do. Whodda thunk it?!
I don't find "the state" to be more trustworthy. But I certainly find an elected government to be more trustworthy than an anonymous business manager.

I do notice that it seems that you don't understand the concept that not all states are created equal in terms of accountability. You, ever the pessimist, assume they are all corrupt and incorrigible.
post #159 of 202
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

I don't find "the state" to be more trustworthy. But I certainly find an elected government to be more trustworthy than an anonymous business manager.

 

I'd love to hear your definition that creates a distinction between the state and "elected government." Sounds like you're playing a word game.

 

That said, I'm sorry to hear where you lay your trust. But I'm not surprised.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

I do notice that it seems that you don't understand the concept that not all states are created equal in terms of accountability. You, ever the pessimist, assume they are all corrupt and incorrigible.

 

Interesting. It seems you have the same perspective on businesses.

 

We clearly see things differently on this. That's cool. We can disagree. Of course, your view allows you to force your values onto me and others. That's an important difference. Oh well.


Edited by MJ1970 - 12/10/12 at 8:23pm

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #160 of 202

This guy most be smoking some good stuff to say this not to intelligent remark.
 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Suck it, haters.