BF2S Forums All men are created equal

Commie Killer wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Parker wrote:

i think thomas jefferson said this just to blow sunshine up peoples asses.

i walked through Monticello when i was 12, and was very taken back by the hidden hallways for the slaves.

No shit, that's some sad stuff.  I personally wouldn't mind having secret passages and hidden hallways through my house.

If your a kid yeah, it'd be pretty cool. But since its a old house it would be pretty hard to sneak out if it considering the floors and everything probably creak.

Creak if you're a lazy ass bitch that doesn't maintain your home.

*edit... And why the hell would I put down wood floors in my secret passages?  I'd go for cement.  rookie.

Last edited by DBBrinson1 (2008-10-17 20:48:42)

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

My algebra teacher would go bonkers if I told her 1=5 and 10=5.

I want someone to explain to me why unequal people are looked at equally, not the same "American freedom is the path to salvation and anyone who disagrees is a Nazi" bullshit that everyone is fed throughout their life. (and is currently regurgitating)

FM: I'm getting what you're getting at, and see where you're coming from, but the reason I believe in total equality is exactly because we are all equally unequal.

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

My algebra teacher would go bonkers if I told her 1=5 and 10=5.

I want someone to explain to me why unequal people are looked at equally, not the same "American freedom is the path to salvation and anyone who disagrees is a Nazi" bullshit that everyone is fed throughout their life. (and is currently regurgitating)

FM: I'm getting what you're getting at, and see where you're coming from, but the reason I believe in total equality is exactly because we are all equally unequal.

But could we not spread the equality into different areas, to give the people that are more informed about one area more sway in the decisions about that area? Essentially political specialization?

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Even though I assume that person was from another country, it would be stupid to think that there are not people of that quality here. Do you think you could take away weapons (under some sort of orders) from someone like that?

i don't get your question tbh.  maybe its the beers.  please explain differently.

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

My algebra teacher would go bonkers if I told her 1=5 and 10=5.

I want someone to explain to me why unequal people are looked at equally, not the same "American freedom is the path to salvation and anyone who disagrees is a Nazi" bullshit that everyone is fed throughout their life. (and is currently regurgitating)

FM: I'm getting what you're getting at, and see where you're coming from, but the reason I believe in total equality is exactly because we are all equally unequal.

But could we not spread the equality into different areas, to give the people that are more informed about one area more sway in the decisions about that area? Essentially political specialization?

Well, yes, obviously, there is, within society, productive roles for each and every individual according to his or her 'abilities' (in the loosest most sense). But just because we can divide people into different categories, we need not, and should not, imo, assign values to those essentially arbitrary groupings.

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Do unequal people deserve equal rights?

Yes
/tread

Commie Killer wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Commie Killer wrote:

If your a kid yeah, it'd be pretty cool. But since its a old house it would be pretty hard to sneak out if it considering the floors and everything probably creak.

Creak if you're a lazy ass bitch that doesn't maintain your home.

*edit... And why the hell would I put down wood floors in my secret passages?  I'd go for cement.  rookie.

Thats a good idea, but are you gonna have I beams holding it up over the basement floor or no basement?

Heuse cristo man... I'm not going to telegraph my secret passage floor plan to the Internets.. Palin might invade through them...

tiger woods and joe the plumber arnt equel

so no

TheAussieReaper wrote:

All you keep saying is:

unequal = unique
          or
or unequal = inequality
          and
inequality = different people skills


Nothing your saying leads me to believe you even know what makes someone unequal, other than the rights our society imposes upon them.

I don't know how to help you then. You take my definition and say it's not a definition.

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Well, yes, obviously, there is, within society, productive roles for each and every individual according to his or her 'abilities' (in the loosest most sense). But just because we can divide people into different categories, we need not, and should not, imo, assign values to those essentially arbitrary groupings.

You misunderstand me. I'm not saying that the worth of a person should be determined by their necessary career specialization, I'm saying that because of the different traits that we all possess we should specialize politically as well and tailor individual rights to that end.

It would be as if there were political doctors and construction workers. Neither is necessarily "better", they are just different. Because they are different they also have different rights, such as the right to prescribe medicine or the right to demolish a building.

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Those that are deviant lose their rights (felons).

If there is one circumstance where that is permitted, what is to say there is not another?

DBBrinson1 wrote:

I did pigeon hole it because it is an important point... And I still have yet to receive an answer from you... Did you write that?  Seriously man... You can't restrict voting to law abiding citizens.  I do understand people losing certain rights due to their disregard for others' rights.  We're on the same page there.  However, you cannot restrict a vote based on interpreted intelligence.  Even a simpleton such a Sara Palin gets it.

I don't really understand how I haven't answered whether I wrote that or not. I quoted it as saying I said it, and then under further questioning I provided the time and place where I said it.

Information based tests are not based on intelligence. The smartest person in the world won't know what a candidate's position is if he or she has never heard it, and the dumbest couldn't help but know the candidate's position if he or she was exposed to it and cared enough to remember.

This quote is probably relevant to the discussion.

"There is nothing more unequal than the equal treatment of unequal people." I'm not going to get involved in the debate, but this might be useful for someone, or as something to discuss.

TheAussieReaper wrote:

Equal rights however, can be taken too extreme. For example, if the politically correct term is now waitperson cause waitress is offensive (try to work that one out) than it's pointless. What's in a name?

Over in England we have to call gingerbread men "gingerbread people" cause some women fucking thought it was unfair. I mean, they're bits of brown... bread stuff that you eat, does it honestly matter?

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

Well, yes, obviously, there is, within society, productive roles for each and every individual according to his or her 'abilities' (in the loosest most sense). But just because we can divide people into different categories, we need not, and should not, imo, assign values to those essentially arbitrary groupings.

You misunderstand me. I'm not saying that the worth of a person should be determined by their necessary career specialization, I'm saying that because of the different traits that we all possess we should specialize politically as well and tailor individual rights to that end.

It would be as if there were political doctors and construction workers. Neither is necessarily "better", they are just different. Because they are different they also have different rights, such as the right to prescribe medicine or the right to demolish a building.

By assigning different groups different 'rights' you are essentially assigning them different 'values'.

A doctors ability to prescribe medicines is not a right it's a privilege.

'Rights' are inherently value based, whereas 'privileges' are not.

What you are suggesting seems to be the basis of a kind of caste system in which an individuals place in society is determined by their occupation.

Last edited by Scorpion0x17 (2008-10-18 14:02:36)

Spearhead wrote:

But Flaming Maniac, you do not choose who to be born under.  I did not choose my parents. 

Sounds like you are advocating this shit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics

Being different does not mean we are unequal.

Good so it is established, we are all equal, deserving of equal rights and opportunities, now, can we agree that we are not all deserving of equal results, That you must earn your results? Somehow I bet not.