Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
without government I am free to murder my neighbor and get away with it if I can. I can then rape his wife and enslave his children.
cool, eh?
A valid argument against anarchy.
But then, no one put forth an argument FOR anarchy.
...and you know it.Without government man is free to do whatever he can given his circumstances, not what he wants
The same monies would be accrued by government. The difference in my new world is that the choice of education would be in play and we would end the money monopoly the government schools possess.
I would have education bucks to spend as I choose on the school of my choice. You do support choice in our personal lives, yes?
I am on a phone at present and thus cannot fully address the depth of your ignorance on the economics of what you proposed.
So check back in a couple hours.
Now then Dreamy. Yes, the same monies would be collected on property taxes, unless increased, even for folks like myself whose kids are grown and no longer in school. But an educated workforce benefits me, so no problemo, for me.
However, if lobbying by private education interests is successful and they bleed government money by selling enough retards on the foolishness that your child costs X and that should be your choice as where to spend it, things get fucked up. Here's why.
Your child's cost is merely an average. We'd still have schools, teachers and admin at the exact same level with or without your kid. But with your kid, the average cost goes down, albeit a fraction of a penny, state-wide. So no biggy, with or without. In fact, adding classrooms comes when student levels reach a point requiring it. Conversely, reduding classrooms and teachers for each grade level, and school, requires student totals to fall below a certain mark. So not all schools would lower cost, but would see diminished money coming in. And private concerns get all kinds of new govmint buckos, in case you're wondering why they spend on lobbying (a big fucking payday, hopefully, for them ... but not us ... since UP goes the cost of education, and soon after your and my property taxes, sales taxes, etc.)
Plus if private education was such a godsend, why are we in such a clusterfuck now with higher / trade school private "educators," suckling the student loan teet, and handing out "degrees" that are bullshit and worthless to potential employers? (answer: change in banko laws, thanks to GWB. Now poor folks can be hoodwinked into huge student loans for "educations" that ain't worth shit, and the poor schmucks are stuck with the debt and payments, without bankos as a way out.) All thanks to good old private "colleges."
conclusion: natural rights is an abstract notion in the minds of man
what a concept, eh?
I stand in awe without the idol worship or other nonsense concerning gods and creators. mankind is awesome to behold
Abstract? I am either born with my freedoms or I am not. I believe I am born with them. I then, in tandem with others, elect a government to protect those freedoms. Our freedoms come before government.
Love is abstract but it exists and can be shown with actions as can freedoms.
Yet another lame straw man argument...Nobody on this thread has advocated anarchy.Not at all - my point was proven, by you.
Without government man is free to do whatever he can given his circumstances, not what he wants
Again, thank you.
without government I am free to murder my neighbor and get away with it if I can. I can then rape his wife and enslave his children.
cool, eh?
Without government man is free to do whatever he can given his circumstances, not what he wants
Stating a truism is far afield from actually advocating it, you fucking blockhead.A valid argument against anarchy.
But then, no one put forth an argument FOR anarchy.
M14 Shooter did, and it was fucking bolded. Need you eyes checked?
Quote: "Without government man is free to do whatever he can given his circumstances, not what he wants."
Did you not pass 8th grade civics?With all this talk about "natural" rights..I was wondering. What are they?
Natural rights are those that do not depend on the existence of government.
Government is not necessary for you to exercise a great number of your rights - as examples, that of free speech, self-defense, self-determination, the ownership of property, to freely practice your religion -- and are therefore all examples of natural rights.
Why would someone fake that which can be shown for real?
By the way there are other ways to "show love" and take the abstract and make it real, apart from orgasm, fake or otherwise. lol
Multiple orgasms is still not the answer but good try.
My guess is she's dropped her nail file and wants to get the foolishness over with. But she says she loves me, so there you have it! Proof positive that love = tangible item. (not true; in fact google "list of tangible items." Love, freedom, best color of red, etc, ain't on the list. They'd be intangibles.)
Is the value of anything based on whether it is tangible?
My freedoms and my loves are the most valuable aspects of my life.
My guess is she's dropped her nail file and wants to get the foolishness over with. But she says she loves me, so there you have it! Proof positive that love = tangible item. (not true; in fact google "list of tangible items." Love, freedom, best color of red, etc, ain't on the list. They'd be intangibles.)
1. Is the value of anything based on whether it is tangible?
2. My freedoms and my loves are the most valuable aspects of my life.
1. Not at all. Merely differentiating concepts and material objects, since that was getting confused by you and others.
2. Glad they're working out for you, and fingers crossed you don't change your mind, and with it, their existence, for you. (noodle on that, and you'll see how they're both conceptual.)
conclusion: natural rights is an abstract notion in the minds of man
what a concept, eh?
I stand in awe without the idol worship or other nonsense concerning gods and creators. mankind is awesome to behold
Abstract? I am either born with my freedoms or I am not. I believe I am born with them. I then, in tandem with others, elect a government to protect those freedoms. Our freedoms come before government.
Love is abstract but it exists and can be shown with actions as can freedoms.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
1. Is the value of anything based on whether it is tangible?
2. My freedoms and my loves are the most valuable aspects of my life.
1. Not at all. Merely differentiating concepts and material objects, since that was getting confused by you and others.
2. Glad they're working out for you, and fingers crossed you don't change your mind, and with it, their existence, for you. (noodle on that, and you'll see how they're both conceptual.)
The people that are confused are the idiots that think intangible means unreal.
What "context" alters the fact that Lincoln endorsed an Amendment to the Constitution that would permanently legalize slavery?
Fool, you stated that Lincoln proposed it. He did not. He did not even endorse it. What he did was in order to avoid a civil war, he stated he would not fight it, then he recognize the legitimacy of the amendment and the process.
Abraham Lincoln, in his first inaugural address, said of the Corwin Amendment:[14][15] Corwin Amendment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"I understand a proposed amendment to the Constitution—which amendment, however, I have not seen—has passed Congress, to the effect that the Federal Government shall never interfere with the domestic institutions of the States, including that of persons held to service....[H]olding such a provision to now be implied constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable."
Just weeks prior to the outbreak of the Civil War, Lincoln sent a letter to each state's governor transmitting the proposed amendment,[16][17] without taking a position on it, and noting that Buchanan had approved it.[18]
In other words, he endorsed it. Your weasel attempt to ascribe good motives to his endorsement is a colossal fail. Furthermore, his motives were entirely sinister.
the fact that many people were not consideredpeople in late eighteenth century America. No women, African Americans, or Indians and few individuals without property were allowed to cast votes. More significantly, no one alive today had anything to do with the ratification process. As Thomas Jefferson famously insisted, the world belongs to the living. It is hard to see how even a pristine process that perfectly captured the views of eighteenth century America can bind the very different people who populate the United States today.
http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1160&context=fwps_papers
Why are we bound to constitutional obedience anyway, the document was written pre-industrialization and bias it excluded many in that (we the people) schpeel.
Governments are brought into force to protect natural rights.without government I am free to murder my neighbor and get away with it if I can. I can then rape his wife and enslave his children.
That's exactly right. That's why we need government, because natural rights can come into conflict.
Thus, of course, necessitates that those rights pre-exist, and therefore exist independent of, government.
evidently you have overdosed on wingnut/moonbat mixed, flavored koolaidClearly you do not understand the concept of "rights" amd have no idea what this conversation is about.Not at all - my point was proven, by you.
Without government man is free to do whatever he can given his circumstances, not what he wants
Again, thank you.
without government I am free to murder my neighbor and get away with it if I can. I can then rape his wife and enslave his children.
cool, eh?
Without government man is free to do whatever he can given his circumstances, not what he wants
Never-the-less, you proved my positrion correct. Thank you.
With all this talk about "natural" rights..I was wondering. What are they?
Doesn't matter, you already admitted I am right.
stop being an idiot. saying it is in some people's nature to demand freedom is not the same as saying there is a natural right to freedom.
To say I believe people should be free, is not akin to saying people have to be free because nature demands it.
Man's nature versus Nature. get IT yet?
Really? The fact that people, and animals, have a natural inclination to be free doesn't prove that it the concept of freedom is not man made concept? Can you explain that without resorting to insults?
Didn't think so, so use insults and feel free not to explain it.
I am not confused, the Constitution is the highest law of the land. You might be able to file a case in court challenging an amendment to a state constitution, but it will not work in challenging the federal one. That is why they specifically passed an amendment to repeal prohibition, courts do not have authority to do so.
See? Dante never said one could challenge a federal amendment.
What he said was a slave could ask the court to look at rights under conflicting amendments
Does Dante offer suffer delusions about what he said and who he is?
conclusion: natural rights is an abstract notion in the minds of man
what a concept, eh?
I stand in awe without the idol worship or other nonsense concerning gods and creators. mankind is awesome to behold
Abstract? I am either born with my freedoms or I am not. I believe I am born with them. I then, in tandem with others, elect a government to protect those freedoms. Our freedoms come before government.
Love is abstract but it exists and can be shown with actions as can freedoms.
One of the meanings of abstract, and the one that Dante is obviously using, is hard to understand.
stop being an idiot. saying it is in some people's nature to demand freedom is not the same as saying there is a natural right to freedom.
To say I believe people should be free, is not akin to saying people have to be free because nature demands it.
Man's nature versus Nature. get IT yet?
Really? The fact that people, and animals, have a natural inclination to be free doesn't prove that it the concept of freedom is not man made concept? Can you explain that without resorting to insults?
Didn't think so, so use insults and feel free not to explain it.
You equating animal instincts and urges with human nature? Mankind has evolved beyond others in the animal kingdom. Animals don't have art, but they piss and shit in patterns. Some can even mimic humans. But conceptually the rest of the animals are far behind. Animals yearn for freedom? I don't think so. They may want to roam as instinct and their natures demand, but the concept of freedom? Whooweee
In Africa slavery was a way of life. Tribes often captured members of other tribes and enslaved them, and a major portion of the slave trade was founded upon tribes capturing members of other tribes.
So I guess you believe Africans were savages violating nature's laws? How very White Man of you if you do.
Yep, that is what I said.
