Forum Settings
       
1 2 3 4 Next »
Reply To Thread

Who Gets to Choose?Follow

#77 Nov 11 2014 at 9:05 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
10,601 posts
Quote:
A man on a deserted island with a coconut would disagree with you.
What makes the coconut his property? What does that mean?

Quote:
If you disagree, then why don't you provide your idea of what freedom is? I've asked this several times now. Funny how you keep harping on me for using terms like "rights" and "freedom" in precisely the way the historical sources of those terms uses them, but you can't be bothered to provide an alternative.
I'm not arguing for a specific definition though, and certainly not an exclusive one. I'm arguing they are legitimately used in more than one way, and that your response to an argument of just saying that these things aren't rights, or that this or that isn't what freedom is isn't useful. I'm not interested in trying to define the term in such a way that no one can argue with me as you are.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#78 Nov 11 2014 at 9:59 PM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Quote:
A man on a deserted island with a coconut would disagree with you.
What makes the coconut his property? What does that mean?
He leased it from the volleyball.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#79 Nov 12 2014 at 4:01 AM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,474 posts
How can it be a deserted island if someone's on it?
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#80 Nov 12 2014 at 4:13 AM Rating: Good
Citizen's Arrest!
******
29,527 posts
Uglysasquatch wrote:
How can it be a deserted island if someone's on it?

Perhaps he is brain damaged and thus unable to think, thus he does not exist while simultaneously existing? Something like Descartes meets Schrödinger?

Yeah, I have nothing and am just rambling to try to avoid having to work.
#81 Nov 12 2014 at 7:54 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
This is going to be another one of those "I don't get my news from anywhere" bits, isn't it?

Where you accidentally admit to something very revealing about yourself and then spend years denying that you ever said it? Probably. Good news for you though, at this point the forum probably won't keep going for years.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#82 Nov 12 2014 at 8:25 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
Could have been worse. Could have brought up when he likened the right to vote to the right to bear arms.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#83 Nov 12 2014 at 8:30 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
This is a guy who fought for pages over a definition of "long rifle" that no one else on the planet uses rather than just concede that he used the wrong word, but when discussing rights he apparently just goes with the flow and uses whatever terms are being bandied about. Riiiigggghhhtttt...
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#84 Nov 12 2014 at 9:28 AM Rating: Good
****
4,137 posts
"End out"
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#85 Nov 12 2014 at 9:42 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
I lost lost track of the gbaji bill-of-rights flow, but still wanted to post a video. Love this album.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#86 Nov 12 2014 at 9:58 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
You're not expecting consistency, are you?

You've come to the wrong shop for logic, brother.

Also, since I haven't quoted Locke in a while:

He that uses his words loosely and unsteadily will either not be minded or not understood.

It's like he knew Gbaji. Amazing.

____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#87 Nov 15 2014 at 7:59 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Gbaji wrote:
I would use the term "protected" rather than "maximized". I also agree completely with the need to make sure that the government is protecting our rights to the greatest degree possible. However, I would hope you'd agree that it's impossible to do that if we don't first have a common understanding of what rights are, and at the very least the understanding that the government doesn't "grant" them, but only protects them. Failing to grasp that leads to other misunderstandings like thinking that by giving people "things", we're giving them "rights", which somehow equates to use being more free. Which would seem to be an appropriate issue to raise given this is precisely what was proposed earlier in this thread.


Giving someone things does not give them rights. Ever. Period. It may or may not be a good thing to do for other reasons, but lets assess that on the value of the things themselves and on those other reason, and not out of the false belief that we're protecting people's rights by doing so.
I agree that the common interpretation of rights is incorrect, but wouldn't the legitimacy of the bold text depend on how the laws are written? If there were a law to say that every freed slave will be given 40 acres and a mule, isn't that a right? Wouldn't that only be true if something were given? Granted, I understand your point in which people think that the government must give them something in order for them to have rights, but I'm pushing back on your absolute approach.
1 2 3 4 Next »
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 335 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (335)