Pages: 1 … 3 4 5 6

 

2009-12-23 10:53:13
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6872|SE London

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

You're a fool if you really believe that. The only limitations required are laws protecting one individual from the action of another. No, this doesn't mean writing anti-discrimination legislation, this means implementing laws as simple as don't commit murder, don't steal etc. Your problem is you think everyone is stupid and incapable of running their own lives. They don't need or want your help.
You're a fool if you believe that anti-discrimination legislation isn't necessary.  Try reading about the Civil Rights Movement and what it had to resist, since you're apparently ignorant of it.

I don't think everyone is stupid, but I do think people who ignore history in favor of clinging to dogmatic ideals are.
I am neither ignoring history, nor clinging to dogmatic ideals. On the contrary, I am a student of history and the early foundation of our country is the only government that has ever been worthy of praise. Our current government is a farce.
The formation of your country doesn't have anything much to do with Liberalism - though many of the concepts it was founded upon are concepts that would be most associated with various Liberal philosophers.

Liberalism is all to do with personal liberty, accountable government and free market principles.

The declaration of independance borrows VERY heavily from the most renowned modern Liberal of all, John Locke. If you're not aware of that, you're not as well read on the history of the foundation of your nation as you thought.
2009-12-23 11:27:24
13rin
Member
+977|6770

Bertster7 wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:


You're a fool if you believe that anti-discrimination legislation isn't necessary.  Try reading about the Civil Rights Movement and what it had to resist, since you're apparently ignorant of it.

I don't think everyone is stupid, but I do think people who ignore history in favor of clinging to dogmatic ideals are.
I am neither ignoring history, nor clinging to dogmatic ideals. On the contrary, I am a student of history and the early foundation of our country is the only government that has ever been worthy of praise. Our current government is a farce.
The formation of your country doesn't have anything much to do with Liberalism - though many of the concepts it was founded upon are concepts that would be most associated with various Liberal philosophers.

Liberalism is all to do with personal liberty, accountable government and free market principles.

The declaration of independance borrows VERY heavily from the most renowned modern Liberal of all, John Locke. If you're not aware of that, you're not as well read on the history of the foundation of your nation as you thought.
Great.  No where in the declaration of independence does is mention government forcing citizens to pay for abortions.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.  - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
2009-12-23 12:53:19
Bertster7
Confused Pothead
+1,101|6872|SE London

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:


I am neither ignoring history, nor clinging to dogmatic ideals. On the contrary, I am a student of history and the early foundation of our country is the only government that has ever been worthy of praise. Our current government is a farce.
The formation of your country doesn't have anything much to do with Liberalism - though many of the concepts it was founded upon are concepts that would be most associated with various Liberal philosophers.

Liberalism is all to do with personal liberty, accountable government and free market principles.

The declaration of independance borrows VERY heavily from the most renowned modern Liberal of all, John Locke. If you're not aware of that, you're not as well read on the history of the foundation of your nation as you thought.
Great.  No where in the declaration of independence does is mention government forcing citizens to pay for abortions.
So what?

That point was to illustrate the fact that the declaration of independence is a document based on liberal philosophy. A good deal of it is based heavily on the writings of Locke, who is widely considered to be the father of modern liberalism. These facts are in stark contrast to JohnG@lt's assertions (that the only government worthy of praise is the one that founded the US, that liberalism is a bad thing and that he knows anything about history).
2009-12-23 13:14:43
13rin
Member
+977|6770

Bertster7 wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:


The formation of your country doesn't have anything much to do with Liberalism - though many of the concepts it was founded upon are concepts that would be most associated with various Liberal philosophers.

Liberalism is all to do with personal liberty, accountable government and free market principles.

The declaration of independance borrows VERY heavily from the most renowned modern Liberal of all, John Locke. If you're not aware of that, you're not as well read on the history of the foundation of your nation as you thought.
Great.  No where in the declaration of independence does is mention government forcing citizens to pay for abortions.
So what?

That point was to illustrate the fact that the declaration of independence is a document based on liberal philosophy. A good deal of it is based heavily on the writings of Locke, who is widely considered to be the father of modern liberalism. These facts are in stark contrast to JohnG@lt's assertions (that the only government worthy of praise is the one that founded the US, that liberalism is a bad thing and that he knows anything about history).
Ok you missed it.  I'll be a bit more clear. What does John Locke have to do with my tax money paying for abortions?
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.  - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
2009-12-23 14:32:03
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6696|North Carolina

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

I am neither ignoring history, nor clinging to dogmatic ideals. On the contrary, I am a student of history and the early foundation of our country is the only government that has ever been worthy of praise. Our current government is a farce.
The formation of your country doesn't have anything much to do with Liberalism - though many of the concepts it was founded upon are concepts that would be most associated with various Liberal philosophers.

Liberalism is all to do with personal liberty, accountable government and free market principles.

The declaration of independance borrows VERY heavily from the most renowned modern Liberal of all, John Locke. If you're not aware of that, you're not as well read on the history of the foundation of your nation as you thought.
Great.  No where in the declaration of independence does is mention government forcing citizens to pay for abortions.
Speaking of red herrings...  The slavery comment was actually more in line with our discussion and relevant to the flaws in Galt's argument.

And to answer your previous post, paying for other people's abortions only relates to the OP in the sense that you have to decide to either pay for abortions or for orphanages.

Liberalism provides the common sense perspective of acknowledging that, whether you like it or not, you end up paying for the decisions of others.  There's no escaping that.

Last edited by Turquoise (2009-12-23 14:34:04)

2009-12-23 14:46:41
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5649|London, England

Bertster7 wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

You're a fool if you believe that anti-discrimination legislation isn't necessary.  Try reading about the Civil Rights Movement and what it had to resist, since you're apparently ignorant of it.

I don't think everyone is stupid, but I do think people who ignore history in favor of clinging to dogmatic ideals are.
I am neither ignoring history, nor clinging to dogmatic ideals. On the contrary, I am a student of history and the early foundation of our country is the only government that has ever been worthy of praise. Our current government is a farce.
The formation of your country doesn't have anything much to do with Liberalism - though many of the concepts it was founded upon are concepts that would be most associated with various Liberal philosophers.

Liberalism is all to do with personal liberty, accountable government and free market principles.

The declaration of independance borrows VERY heavily from the most renowned modern Liberal of all, John Locke. If you're not aware of that, you're not as well read on the history of the foundation of your nation as you thought.
Current American Liberals have no relevance in a discussion with classical liberals such as Locke. They are night and day. That's my entire point.

True liberals, in a classical sense, are only found in those that call themselves Libertarians.

Last edited by JohnG@lt (2009-12-23 14:48:01)

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2009-12-23 15:10:53
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6696|North Carolina

JohnG@lt wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:


I am neither ignoring history, nor clinging to dogmatic ideals. On the contrary, I am a student of history and the early foundation of our country is the only government that has ever been worthy of praise. Our current government is a farce.
The formation of your country doesn't have anything much to do with Liberalism - though many of the concepts it was founded upon are concepts that would be most associated with various Liberal philosophers.

Liberalism is all to do with personal liberty, accountable government and free market principles.

The declaration of independance borrows VERY heavily from the most renowned modern Liberal of all, John Locke. If you're not aware of that, you're not as well read on the history of the foundation of your nation as you thought.
Current American Liberals have no relevance in a discussion with classical liberals such as Locke. They are night and day. That's my entire point.

True liberals, in a classical sense, are only found in those that call themselves Libertarians.
If we use that specific terminology, then the Left is socialism, the Right is conservatism, Libertarians are liberalism, and the 4th political pole is Populism.

Either way, some Founding Fathers supported socialistic policies, like Thomas Paine.  So socialism is as much a part of our founding as classical liberalism (libertarianism), conservatism, and populism.
2009-12-23 15:17:02
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5649|London, England

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:


The formation of your country doesn't have anything much to do with Liberalism - though many of the concepts it was founded upon are concepts that would be most associated with various Liberal philosophers.

Liberalism is all to do with personal liberty, accountable government and free market principles.

The declaration of independance borrows VERY heavily from the most renowned modern Liberal of all, John Locke. If you're not aware of that, you're not as well read on the history of the foundation of your nation as you thought.
Current American Liberals have no relevance in a discussion with classical liberals such as Locke. They are night and day. That's my entire point.

True liberals, in a classical sense, are only found in those that call themselves Libertarians.
If we use that specific terminology, then the Left is socialism, the Right is conservatism, Libertarians are liberalism, and the 4th political pole is Populism.

Either way, some Founding Fathers supported socialistic policies, like Thomas Paine.  So socialism is as much a part of our founding as classical liberalism (libertarianism), conservatism, and populism.
Paine was a Brit, not an American.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2009-12-23 15:17:30
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6736|The Land of Scott Walker
I don't pay for other people condoms and birth control pills, shouldn't have to pay for their abortion either.  If you weren't responsible enough to wrap up or pop a pill, you can spring your own cash to murder your baby.
2009-12-23 16:57:30
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6696|North Carolina

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:


Current American Liberals have no relevance in a discussion with classical liberals such as Locke. They are night and day. That's my entire point.

True liberals, in a classical sense, are only found in those that call themselves Libertarians.
If we use that specific terminology, then the Left is socialism, the Right is conservatism, Libertarians are liberalism, and the 4th political pole is Populism.

Either way, some Founding Fathers supported socialistic policies, like Thomas Paine.  So socialism is as much a part of our founding as classical liberalism (libertarianism), conservatism, and populism.
Paine was a Brit, not an American.
By birth, yes...  But Paine participated in the American Revolution and strongly advocated independence from Britain.  He also influenced the French Revolution.
2009-12-23 16:58:45
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6696|North Carolina

Stingray24 wrote:

I don't pay for other people condoms and birth control pills, shouldn't have to pay for their abortion either.  If you weren't responsible enough to wrap up or pop a pill, you can spring your own cash to murder your baby.
As mentioned earlier, I hope you're willing to make some sort of consolation for rape.
2009-12-23 18:34:50
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|7007

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:


Current American Liberals have no relevance in a discussion with classical liberals such as Locke. They are night and day. That's my entire point.

True liberals, in a classical sense, are only found in those that call themselves Libertarians.
If we use that specific terminology, then the Left is socialism, the Right is conservatism, Libertarians are liberalism, and the 4th political pole is Populism.

Either way, some Founding Fathers supported socialistic policies, like Thomas Paine.  So socialism is as much a part of our founding as classical liberalism (libertarianism), conservatism, and populism.
Paine was a Brit, not an American.
Wasn't he offered American Citizenship as well? So in a sense he is an American, kinda like how the founding fathers were only Americans after the revolution.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
2009-12-23 19:36:42
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6966|Canberra, AUS

Stingray24 wrote:

I don't pay for other people condoms and birth control pills, shouldn't have to pay for their abortion either.  If you weren't responsible enough to wrap up or pop a pill, you can spring your own cash to murder your baby.
where on earth have you been for the last few months???
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2009-12-23 19:44:22
13rin
Member
+977|6770

Cybargs wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

If we use that specific terminology, then the Left is socialism, the Right is conservatism, Libertarians are liberalism, and the 4th political pole is Populism.

Either way, some Founding Fathers supported socialistic policies, like Thomas Paine.  So socialism is as much a part of our founding as classical liberalism (libertarianism), conservatism, and populism.
Paine was a Brit, not an American.
Wasn't he offered American Citizenship as well? So in a sense he is an American, kinda like how the founding fathers were only Americans after the revolution.
Well this has been pleasantly de-railed.  It's usually f'bomb name calling derail...  Fine, I'll go with it.  In a sense the US has had instances in history where true heroes to her country have been ignored or forgotten.  For example John Paul Jones.

Spark wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

I don't pay for other people condoms and birth control pills, shouldn't have to pay for their abortion either.  If you weren't responsible enough to wrap up or pop a pill, you can spring your own cash to murder your baby.
where on earth have you been for the last few months???
No shit.  Well it is nice to see that 88 race car avatar again -actually wasn't it 24 at one time?  hehe.
I stood in line for four hours. They better give me a Wal-Mart gift card, or something.  - Rodney Booker, Job Fair attendee.
2009-12-23 20:59:47
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5649|London, England

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:


If we use that specific terminology, then the Left is socialism, the Right is conservatism, Libertarians are liberalism, and the 4th political pole is Populism.

Either way, some Founding Fathers supported socialistic policies, like Thomas Paine.  So socialism is as much a part of our founding as classical liberalism (libertarianism), conservatism, and populism.
Paine was a Brit, not an American.
By birth, yes...  But Paine participated in the American Revolution and strongly advocated independence from Britain.  He also influenced the French Revolution.
Claim whoever you want. The closest intellectual antecedent of modern day liberals in America was Alexander Hamilton. Modern liberalsim is nothing more than a mix of Hamilton, Keynes and Marx. They make strange bedfellows which is why the Democratic platform doesn't make a lick of sense.

I count Jefferson, Mill and Friedman as my own. I didn't get my ideas from them, I formed my own ideas and then found myself agreeing with everything they'd written when I stumbled upon it.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2009-12-23 21:13:59
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6966|Canberra, AUS

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:


Paine was a Brit, not an American.
By birth, yes...  But Paine participated in the American Revolution and strongly advocated independence from Britain.  He also influenced the French Revolution.
Claim whoever you want. The closest intellectual antecedent of modern day liberals in America was Alexander Hamilton. Modern liberalsim is nothing more than a mix of Hamilton, Keynes and Marx. They make strange bedfellows which is why the Democratic platform doesn't make a lick of sense.

I count Jefferson, Mill and Friedman as my own. I didn't get my ideas from them, I formed my own ideas and then found myself agreeing with everything they'd written when I stumbled upon it.
OT but Hamilton died a lulzy death.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2009-12-24 05:39:30
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5649|London, England

Spark wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:


By birth, yes...  But Paine participated in the American Revolution and strongly advocated independence from Britain.  He also influenced the French Revolution.
Claim whoever you want. The closest intellectual antecedent of modern day liberals in America was Alexander Hamilton. Modern liberalsim is nothing more than a mix of Hamilton, Keynes and Marx. They make strange bedfellows which is why the Democratic platform doesn't make a lick of sense.

I count Jefferson, Mill and Friedman as my own. I didn't get my ideas from them, I formed my own ideas and then found myself agreeing with everything they'd written when I stumbled upon it.
OT but Hamilton died a lulzy death.
He was the major big government proponent in the early US.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2009-12-24 07:35:12
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|7007

Spark wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:

Turquoise wrote:


By birth, yes...  But Paine participated in the American Revolution and strongly advocated independence from Britain.  He also influenced the French Revolution.
Claim whoever you want. The closest intellectual antecedent of modern day liberals in America was Alexander Hamilton. Modern liberalsim is nothing more than a mix of Hamilton, Keynes and Marx. They make strange bedfellows which is why the Democratic platform doesn't make a lick of sense.

I count Jefferson, Mill and Friedman as my own. I didn't get my ideas from them, I formed my own ideas and then found myself agreeing with everything they'd written when I stumbled upon it.
OT but Hamilton died a lulzy death.
Burr fucked his shit up.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
2009-12-24 08:16:45
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,006|5649|London, England

Cybargs wrote:

Spark wrote:

JohnG@lt wrote:


Claim whoever you want. The closest intellectual antecedent of modern day liberals in America was Alexander Hamilton. Modern liberalsim is nothing more than a mix of Hamilton, Keynes and Marx. They make strange bedfellows which is why the Democratic platform doesn't make a lick of sense.

I count Jefferson, Mill and Friedman as my own. I didn't get my ideas from them, I formed my own ideas and then found myself agreeing with everything they'd written when I stumbled upon it.
OT but Hamilton died a lulzy death.
Burr fucked his shit up.
I guess people remember the milk commercial eh?
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
2009-12-24 11:19:59
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6696|North Carolina

JohnG@lt wrote:

Claim whoever you want. The closest intellectual antecedent of modern day liberals in America was Alexander Hamilton. Modern liberalsim is nothing more than a mix of Hamilton, Keynes and Marx. They make strange bedfellows which is why the Democratic platform doesn't make a lick of sense.

I count Jefferson, Mill and Friedman as my own. I didn't get my ideas from them, I formed my own ideas and then found myself agreeing with everything they'd written when I stumbled upon it.
Fair enough, but Marx was actually more anarchic than a lot of conservatives and Libertarians seem to realize.  Most of what we know as Communism today has more to do with Lenin and Stalin.  Later in his life, Marx would reject much of what people had used his ideology for.
2009-12-25 11:35:06
Stingray24
Proud member of the vast right-wing conspiracy
+1,060|6736|The Land of Scott Walker

Turquoise wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

I don't pay for other people condoms and birth control pills, shouldn't have to pay for their abortion either.  If you weren't responsible enough to wrap up or pop a pill, you can spring your own cash to murder your baby.
As mentioned earlier, I hope you're willing to make some sort of consolation for rape.
That will always be a difficult situation, unique because the woman has no responsibility for the pregnancy.  However, does the baby need to be killed because of how he/she was conceived?  It certainly would be extremely difficult to carry the child and raise him/her or adopt them out, but I think a woman would end up enduring a 2nd tragedy by aborting.  All depends on how one views life.  If innocent life is sacred, then the woman will believe there is a purpose for the child and raise him/her.  If the mother does not view life that way, she may choose abortion.  Should taxpayers fund that?  I still don't like the idea, but forcing a woman who has been raped to pay for the abortion doesn't seem right either.   

Spark wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

I don't pay for other people condoms and birth control pills, shouldn't have to pay for their abortion either.  If you weren't responsible enough to wrap up or pop a pill, you can spring your own cash to murder your baby.
where on earth have you been for the last few months???
Hey, Spark, thanks for asking.  Been busy w/ work and just life in general.  Not as much time to hang out with you guys. 

DBBrinson1 wrote:

No shit.  Well it is nice to see that 88 race car avatar again -actually wasn't it 24 at one time?  hehe.
Hmmm, don’t recall if I had the 24 or not, though I do like him as a driver as well.
2009-12-26 00:34:41
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6966|Canberra, AUS

Stingray24 wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

I don't pay for other people condoms and birth control pills, shouldn't have to pay for their abortion either.  If you weren't responsible enough to wrap up or pop a pill, you can spring your own cash to murder your baby.
As mentioned earlier, I hope you're willing to make some sort of consolation for rape.
That will always be a difficult situation, unique because the woman has no responsibility for the pregnancy.  However, does the baby need to be killed because of how he/she was conceived?  It certainly would be extremely difficult to carry the child and raise him/her or adopt them out, but I think a woman would end up enduring a 2nd tragedy by aborting.  All depends on how one views life.  If innocent life is sacred, then the woman will believe there is a purpose for the child and raise him/her.  If the mother does not view life that way, she may choose abortion.  Should taxpayers fund that?  I still don't like the idea, but forcing a woman who has been raped to pay for the abortion doesn't seem right either.   

Spark wrote:

Stingray24 wrote:

I don't pay for other people condoms and birth control pills, shouldn't have to pay for their abortion either.  If you weren't responsible enough to wrap up or pop a pill, you can spring your own cash to murder your baby.
where on earth have you been for the last few months???
Hey, Spark, thanks for asking.  Been busy w/ work and just life in general.  Not as much time to hang out with you guys. 

DBBrinson1 wrote:

No shit.  Well it is nice to see that 88 race car avatar again -actually wasn't it 24 at one time?  hehe.
Hmmm, don’t recall if I had the 24 or not, though I do like him as a driver as well.
Oh. WB anyway.

---

I have a slight moral issue here too, I don't like abortions personally though I recognise that it's none of my damn business unless I have to pay for it, then it's a much more difficult question. Of course, if rape is involved then it becomes a very easy and straightforward question.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2009-12-28 14:14:42
cpt.fass1
The Cap'n Can Make it Hap'n
+329|6987|NJ
Talking about the movie "Precious" this weekend with my sister and other teachers who have worked in Ghetto areas.

From what they were saying is that a large population of those districts are populated by Inbreed people.. So what's cheaper abortions or welfare?

Last edited by cpt.fass1 (2009-12-28 14:15:21)

2010-01-02 14:47:40
ruisleipa
Member
+149|6513|teh FIN-land

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Anyway, in a nutshell, a group of individuals ganging on another individual to enforce their moral will on that person is the root of socialism.
I was with you until here. So you're saying that a 'socialist' would be AGAINST abortion and FOR the death penalty? So the republican party and mad evangelical Christians are socialists??? err....
2010-01-02 14:55:50
Macbeth
Banned
+2,444|5876

ruisleipa wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Anyway, in a nutshell, a group of individuals ganging on another individual to enforce their moral will on that person is the root of socialism.
I was with you until here. So you're saying that a 'socialist' would be AGAINST abortion and FOR the death penalty? So the republican party and mad evangelical Christians are socialists??? err....
Um I think you took it a bit out of context.

 

Pages: 1 … 3 4 5 6

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard