In this thread: I destroy liberal Ideology by playing the part of a liberal

[BlindBoo]

yet it is being made a Republican v Democrat issue today....Democrats keep claiming that Republicans are racist bigots.....when history shows otherwise...

....the facts show 80% of Rs were FOR the Civil Rights bill while only 60% of the Ds were for it......and a large group of Democrats filibustered against it.....

As if there are no racist bigots among Democrats and Republicans.

Fact also show that 100% of Southern Republicans were against it while only 95% of southern Democrats were against it.

of course there were racist bigots in both parties back then....i'm sure today as well....

still no reason to call Republicans bigots because SOUTHERNERS as a whole were bigots...

I don't recall ever making a statement that Republicans were bigots merely because they are Republicans, southern or not.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Parents not loving their kids has horrific effects on people and their families, doesn't mean we should legislate gov't forced parental love.

Besides, alcohol and prescription drugs do the same thing. Hell even addictions to things besides drugs, gambling for example does the same thing.

so because other things are bad too we should just stop trying to improve civilization....? society lives or dies by its morals...

Listen, no one’s saying that we shouldn’t improve ourselves, and teach out kids strong morals and how to live a good and decent life.

What this argument specifically comes down to:

1.) Who’s responsibility is it to micro-manage our personal morals, is it the individual (empowerment) or the government (nanny-state/fear)?
2.) By making drugs illegal (or any other sorts of non rights infringing activities), are we actually doing much more harm to society than good?

As long as drugs are illegal, there will be trafficking and horrible negative societal consequences. The only way to get rid of it is to legalize the drugs (think about the end of prohibition).

Also think about our incarceration problem. If a non-violent, intelligent human being gets caught selling marijuana and thrown in jail, do you think there’s a greater chance he/she will be a more productive member of society when released, or less? By all means, incarcerate the murders, rapists, pedophiles, ect, but is it really worth our resources to spend so much time policing people who are not infringing on anyone else’s personal rights except for their own? I don’t think so…

1. it is the right of individuals to set societal standards...via the vote...

2. drugs today are basically "legal".....in the sense that you can pretty much get them whenever you like.....making them legal on paper won't change much...

so hows that working....? myself i see a lot of problems today caused by drugs....society is being harmed by their use....

if government actually stopped the trafficking the incarceration problem would go away...

 

[Dr.Drock]

so because other things are bad too we should just stop trying to improve civilization....? society lives or dies by its morals...

Listen, no one’s saying that we shouldn’t improve ourselves, and teach out kids strong morals and how to live a good and decent life.

What this argument specifically comes down to:

1.) Who’s responsibility is it to micro-manage our personal morals, is it the individual (empowerment) or the government (nanny-state/fear)?
2.) By making drugs illegal (or any other sorts of non rights infringing activities), are we actually doing much more harm to society than good?

As long as drugs are illegal, there will be trafficking and horrible negative societal consequences. The only way to get rid of it is to legalize the drugs (think about the end of prohibition).

Also think about our incarceration problem. If a non-violent, intelligent human being gets caught selling marijuana and thrown in jail, do you think there’s a greater chance he/she will be a more productive member of society when released, or less? By all means, incarcerate the murders, rapists, pedophiles, ect, but is it really worth our resources to spend so much time policing people who are not infringing on anyone else’s personal rights except for their own? I don’t think so…

1. it is the right of individuals to set societal standards...via the vote...

2. drugs today are basically "legal".....in the sense that you can pretty much get them whenever you like.....making them legal on paper won't change much...

so hows that working....? myself i see a lot of problems today caused by drugs....society is being harmed by their use....

if government actually stopped the trafficking the incarceration problem would go away...

Can't stop the trafficking, too much money in it. You can only change those who benefit from trafficking. Right now drug lords, terrorists, gang bangers, thugs are the ones benefitting from trafficking, where that could be changed to american farmers and businesses.

Yes drugs are very much available, which is evidence of the failure of the War on (some) Drugs.

It is not the right of the majority to vote away the liberties of the minority.

 

[Vast LWC]

bs...

just because Strom Thurmon and some others joined the GOP because Johnson signed the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 (no thanks to Democrats).... all of a sudden the GOP was "chock full" of racists.....?

the truth of the matter is that after Civil Rights passed a new generation of southerners emerged to join the GOP....

the Democrats still had plenty of racist bigots like George Wallace to lead the way....

If you look at the districts that were run by Democrats at that point, they are almost all now Republican.

It doesn't matter that the politicians didn't switch parties. That's not the point. They weren't acting on their own, they were representing their constituencies, which is their job, of course.

Besides those politicians are pretty much all dead now anyway.

It's the people they represent that matter. They voted in new people to represent their bigoted points of view, and those representatives are almost all REPUBLICAN.

That's why Republicans almost always win the south nowadays.

Therefore, the new generation of southern bigots is mainly Republican.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Listen, no one’s saying that we shouldn’t improve ourselves, and teach out kids strong morals and how to live a good and decent life.

What this argument specifically comes down to:

1.) Who’s responsibility is it to micro-manage our personal morals, is it the individual (empowerment) or the government (nanny-state/fear)?
2.) By making drugs illegal (or any other sorts of non rights infringing activities), are we actually doing much more harm to society than good?

As long as drugs are illegal, there will be trafficking and horrible negative societal consequences. The only way to get rid of it is to legalize the drugs (think about the end of prohibition).

Also think about our incarceration problem. If a non-violent, intelligent human being gets caught selling marijuana and thrown in jail, do you think there’s a greater chance he/she will be a more productive member of society when released, or less? By all means, incarcerate the murders, rapists, pedophiles, ect, but is it really worth our resources to spend so much time policing people who are not infringing on anyone else’s personal rights except for their own? I don’t think so…

1. it is the right of individuals to set societal standards...via the vote...

2. drugs today are basically "legal".....in the sense that you can pretty much get them whenever you like.....making them legal on paper won't change much...

so hows that working....? myself i see a lot of problems today caused by drugs....society is being harmed by their use....

if government actually stopped the trafficking the incarceration problem would go away...

Can't stop the trafficking, too much money in it. You can only change those who benefit from trafficking. Right now drug lords, terrorists, gang bangers, thugs are the ones benefitting from trafficking, where that could be changed to american farmers and businesses.

Yes drugs are very much available, which is evidence of the failure of the War on (some) Drugs.

It is not the right of the majority to vote away the liberties of the minority.

what about our rights to be free of druggers infecting our society....?

 

[Dr.Drock]

1. it is the right of individuals to set societal standards...via the vote...

2. drugs today are basically "legal".....in the sense that you can pretty much get them whenever you like.....making them legal on paper won't change much...

so hows that working....? myself i see a lot of problems today caused by drugs....society is being harmed by their use....

if government actually stopped the trafficking the incarceration problem would go away...

Can't stop the trafficking, too much money in it. You can only change those who benefit from trafficking. Right now drug lords, terrorists, gang bangers, thugs are the ones benefitting from trafficking, where that could be changed to american farmers and businesses.

Yes drugs are very much available, which is evidence of the failure of the War on (some) Drugs.

It is not the right of the majority to vote away the liberties of the minority.

what about our rights to be free of druggers infecting our society....?

Has the Drug War achieved that? Are we progressing towards that thanks to the Drug War?

And as already shown, someone doing drugs in their home has no impact on your life. If they step out of their home and break a law while driving or break into your home or assault you, they should be punished.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

bs...

just because Strom Thurmon and some others joined the GOP because Johnson signed the Civil Rights Bill of 1964 (no thanks to Democrats).... all of a sudden the GOP was "chock full" of racists.....?

the truth of the matter is that after Civil Rights passed a new generation of southerners emerged to join the GOP....

the Democrats still had plenty of racist bigots like George Wallace to lead the way....

If you look at the districts that were run by Democrats at that point, they are almost all now Republican.

It doesn't matter that the politicians didn't switch parties. That's not the point. They weren't acting on their own, they were representing their constituencies, which is their job, of course.

Besides those politicians are pretty much all dead now anyway.

It's the people they represent that matter. They voted in new people to represent their bigoted points of view, and those representatives are almost all REPUBLICAN.

That's why Republicans almost always win the south nowadays.

Therefore, the new generation of southern bigots is mainly Republican.

wrong.....after Civil Rights passed it was the bigoted Democrats who enslaved the blacks all over again....

many southern whites "evolved" after 1964 and more joined the Republican Party.....like Newt Gingrich in Georgia for example...

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Can't stop the trafficking, too much money in it. You can only change those who benefit from trafficking. Right now drug lords, terrorists, gang bangers, thugs are the ones benefitting from trafficking, where that could be changed to american farmers and businesses.

Yes drugs are very much available, which is evidence of the failure of the War on (some) Drugs.

It is not the right of the majority to vote away the liberties of the minority.

what about our rights to be free of druggers infecting our society....?

Has the Drug War achieved that? Are we progressing towards that thanks to the Drug War?

And as already shown, someone doing drugs in their home has no impact on your life. If they step out of their home and break a law while driving or break into your home or assault you, they should be punished.

what about the children of those druggies who live in those homes.....? imagine how they grow up and what kind of problems they have.....you can't tell me that that does not affect society....

 

[Vast LWC]

wrong.....after Civil Rights passed it was the bigoted Democrats who enslaved the blacks all over again....

many southern whites "evolved" after 1964 and more joined the Republican Party.....like Newt Gingrich in Georgia for example...

Wow. That is some serious spin.

I'm shocked you don't break your neck spinning that fast.

 

[KevinWestern]

1. it is the right of individuals to set societal standards...via the vote...

2. drugs today are basically "legal".....in the sense that you can pretty much get them whenever you like.....making them legal on paper won't change much...

so hows that working....? myself i see a lot of problems today caused by drugs....society is being harmed by their use....

if government actually stopped the trafficking the incarceration problem would go away...

Can't stop the trafficking, too much money in it. You can only change those who benefit from trafficking. Right now drug lords, terrorists, gang bangers, thugs are the ones benefitting from trafficking, where that could be changed to american farmers and businesses.

Yes drugs are very much available, which is evidence of the failure of the War on (some) Drugs.

It is not the right of the majority to vote away the liberties of the minority.

what about our rights to be free of druggers infecting our society....?

You don’t have the right to restrict people from taking part in activities that don’t pertain to you, or simply on the grounds that you "don’t agree with it personally". To restrict those rights is unAmerican.

And guess what we can vote on anything – I realize that – however I will always be in opposition to measures where the ignorant population votes away it’s personal liberties.

And what changes if you make drugs legal on paper (you ask)? The major change is how drugs are grown and delivered. Currently they are gown/delivered through illegal, violent channels that play by nobody’s rules but their own. If legalized, growers/sellers will be legitimitized and it will no longer be economically beneficial to use violent force to deliver their products.

Have you heard any recent stories about the ‘Miller Lite boys’ shooting up a Budweiser delivery truck over a “turf” dispute? I haven’t personally…



.

 

[Vast LWC]

So... What you're basically saying is all those Southerners suddenly realized the error of their ways after Civil Rights was passed, and switched to the Republican Party in order to further the progress of Civil Rights everywhere.

Wow, do you have any idea how ludicrous that sounds?

 

[Dr.Drock]

what about our rights to be free of druggers infecting our society....?

Has the Drug War achieved that? Are we progressing towards that thanks to the Drug War?

And as already shown, someone doing drugs in their home has no impact on your life. If they step out of their home and break a law while driving or break into your home or assault you, they should be punished.

what about the children of those druggies who live in those homes.....? imagine how they grow up and what kind of problems they have.....you can't tell me that that does not affect society....

If the children are abused by those druggies, the druggies should be punished.

Again we can't legislate people into being good parents. I doubt keeping the Drug War going is making bad parents into good ones.

Edit: And keep in mind screaming, in order for your argument to be consistent you have to argue for the criminalization of alcohol.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

wrong.....after Civil Rights passed it was the bigoted Democrats who enslaved the blacks all over again....

many southern whites "evolved" after 1964 and more joined the Republican Party.....like Newt Gingrich in Georgia for example...

Wow. That is some serious spin.

I'm shocked you don't break your neck spinning that fast.

spin...? lots of blacks aren't even off the plantation yet.....that's why they keep voting Democrat...

So... What you're basically saying is all those Southerners suddenly realized the error of their ways after Civil Rights was passed, and switched to the Republican Party in order to further the progress of Civil Rights everywhere.

i didn't say that....but after 1964 the political demographics started changing in the South...

 

[Foxfyre]

So... What you're basically saying is all those Southerners suddenly realized the error of their ways after Civil Rights was passed, and switched to the Republican Party in order to further the progress of Civil Rights everywhere.

Wow, do you have any idea how ludicrous that sounds?

Or a more pragmatic view might be that Democrats continue to fight the 'race' or 'equality' wars because it is very big business and very profitable to them to do so. And in so doing, they keep their constituency corraled on the plantation.

Republicans take the view that the war and all the essential battles have been won and it is now time to stop fighting the war and allow the dividends of peace to kick in and allow racism becomes a distant memory. To artificially keep it alive is doing far more harm than any good.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Can't stop the trafficking, too much money in it. You can only change those who benefit from trafficking. Right now drug lords, terrorists, gang bangers, thugs are the ones benefitting from trafficking, where that could be changed to american farmers and businesses.

Yes drugs are very much available, which is evidence of the failure of the War on (some) Drugs.

It is not the right of the majority to vote away the liberties of the minority.

what about our rights to be free of druggers infecting our society....?

You don’t have the right to restrict people from taking part in activities that don’t pertain to you, or simply on the grounds that you "don’t agree with it personally". To restrict those rights is unAmerican.

And guess what we can vote on anything – I realize that – however I will always be in opposition to measures where the ignorant population votes away it’s personal liberties.

And what changes if you make drugs legal on paper (you ask)? The major change is how drugs are grown and delivered. Currently they are gown/delivered through illegal, violent channels that play by nobody’s rules but their own. If legalized, growers/sellers will be legitimitized and it will no longer be economically beneficial to use violent force to deliver their products.

Have you heard any recent stories about the ‘Miller Lite boys’ shooting up a Budweiser delivery truck over a “turf” dispute? I haven’t personally…

.

It's not "unAmerican".....via the vote we restrict peoples' activities all the time....

i don't care "how" the drugs are delivered.....the point is to STOP them from being delivered in the first place...

 

[BlindBoo]

so because other things are bad too we should just stop trying to improve civilization....? society lives or dies by its morals...

Listen, no one’s saying that we shouldn’t improve ourselves, and teach out kids strong morals and how to live a good and decent life.

What this argument specifically comes down to:

1.) Who’s responsibility is it to micro-manage our personal morals, is it the individual (empowerment) or the government (nanny-state/fear)?
2.) By making drugs illegal (or any other sorts of non rights infringing activities), are we actually doing much more harm to society than good?

As long as drugs are illegal, there will be trafficking and horrible negative societal consequences. The only way to get rid of it is to legalize the drugs (think about the end of prohibition).

Also think about our incarceration problem. If a non-violent, intelligent human being gets caught selling marijuana and thrown in jail, do you think there’s a greater chance he/she will be a more productive member of society when released, or less? By all means, incarcerate the murders, rapists, pedophiles, ect, but is it really worth our resources to spend so much time policing people who are not infringing on anyone else’s personal rights except for their own? I don’t think so…

1. it is the right of individuals to set societal standards...via the vote...

2. drugs today are basically "legal".....in the sense that you can pretty much get them whenever you like.....making them legal on paper won't change much...

so hows that working....? myself i see a lot of problems today caused by drugs....society is being harmed by their use....

if government actually stopped the trafficking the incarceration problem would go away...

1. The tyranny of Democracy! The 51% votes to kill the 49%. You okay with that?

2. There is a profit motive to arrest non-violent pot smokers and put them in tax payer funded private prisons.

Society is being harmed more by the laws rather than the behavior the laws were meant to curb.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Has the Drug War achieved that? Are we progressing towards that thanks to the Drug War?

And as already shown, someone doing drugs in their home has no impact on your life. If they step out of their home and break a law while driving or break into your home or assault you, they should be punished.

what about the children of those druggies who live in those homes.....? imagine how they grow up and what kind of problems they have.....you can't tell me that that does not affect society....

If the children are abused by those druggies, the druggies should be punished.

Again we can't legislate people into being good parents. I doubt keeping the Drug War going is making bad parents into good ones.

Edit: And keep in mind screaming, in order for your argument to be consistent you have to argue for the criminalization of alcohol.

we have the right to vote for or against alcohol or drugs....

just like we can vote for or against marriage or gay marriage....

that's the American way...

 

[theDoctorisIn]

what about the children of those druggies who live in those homes.....? imagine how they grow up and what kind of problems they have.....you can't tell me that that does not affect society....

If the children are abused by those druggies, the druggies should be punished.

Again we can't legislate people into being good parents. I doubt keeping the Drug War going is making bad parents into good ones.

Edit: And keep in mind screaming, in order for your argument to be consistent you have to argue for the criminalization of alcohol.

we have the right to vote for or against alcohol or drugs....

just like we can vote for or against marriage or gay marriage....

that's the American way...

Is it really? Basing social laws on popular vote?

Since when?

 

[Immanuel]

/beginLiberalism

I am against swimming. It's gross, unhealthy, and unnatural. If humans were meant to swim, whether in pools, oceans, or lakes, we would have fins.

Swimming goes against my personal, abstract beliefs. Therefore, I will stop at nothing until swimming is banned for everyone. I also believe the government should stay out of our lives and that we own our own body--unless there is something I don't like, in which case I want tyranny of the majority to push for government force to make it illegal. I'm better than you if you think otherwise.

/end being a liberal

You know, I've never heard a "liberal" say anything like that.

But it certainly looks like the standard conservative opinion on gay marriage.

Reminds me a hell of a lot about the liberal attack on smoking in bars and hell... even your own homes.

Immie

 

[Dr.Drock]

what about the children of those druggies who live in those homes.....? imagine how they grow up and what kind of problems they have.....you can't tell me that that does not affect society....

If the children are abused by those druggies, the druggies should be punished.

Again we can't legislate people into being good parents. I doubt keeping the Drug War going is making bad parents into good ones.

Edit: And keep in mind screaming, in order for your argument to be consistent you have to argue for the criminalization of alcohol.

we have the right to vote for or against alcohol or drugs....

just like we can vote for or against marriage or gay marriage....

that's the American way...

Voting away rights or liberties is the Iranian way.