Teacher fired for breaking up fight.

[Harrekin]

By product??!! No whey!

Forced association is a "by product" of force silly goose. If the association is not consensual, it shares the same interaction tactics / method as rapists, thugs and coercive government types. You advocate associations that are derived and blessed by initiated force. I do not.

The person that seeks to disassociate is not the one applying the force. They are trying NOT to interact.

As far as me employing racists practices, that's a false allegation on your part, an attempt to reconstruct another persons argument on your part. You're pretty good at that, but it's often all you've got........besides your gerbils.


I will leave people alone if they seek to disassociate. and agree to leave others alone, even if I disagree with their reasoning for not wanting to associate with somebody. You will not. You share that trait with prohibitionists, the KKK, the DEA and other dickwads of that ilk.

So, no, I am NOT advocating racism and never have. Yet when some kind of racism is part of a persons belief and unbacked by any actionable act, I will leave that person alone. My response is, NOT to associate with known racists. Yours is to invade their property even when they are not invading anothers property.

I will not initiate aggression against a person for thinking something I disagree with. I will respect their right to own themselves and their property. You will not.

The line for you to approve of initiating aggression is you would go so far as to invade a persons property to make them interact with you. I would not.

I know the difference between seeking disassociation and invading anothers property. You ignore this difference.

I agree with your notion of property rights, but think disassociation from a state/nation to be unworkable.

How would you reconcile your view with practical reality?

Genuine question, Iv been trying to do it in my head for a while, hence my (so far) lack of agreement with you.

 

[Rob Roy]

Nice argument. It really backs your premise.

 

[darrellduaner]

i dont think its impractical at all. the only impractical notion is that such extreme bigots would make up a large enough portion of the population to matter at all

 

[Harrekin]

i dont think its impractical at all. the only impractical notion is that such extreme bigots would make up a large enough portion of the population to matter at all

Impractical for example in the sense that disassociation in taxation but the expectation of use of public facilities, like roads for example.

 

[Rob Roy]

I agree with your notion of property rights, but think disassociation from a state/nation to be unworkable.

How would you reconcile your view with practical reality?

Genuine question, Iv been trying to do it in my head for a while, hence my (so far) lack of agreement with you.

Thank you for asking.

The state forces association doesn't it? So if you agree that people have property rights, then nobody can (or should) own them, that would include an institution such as a state/nation that derives its "members" from an automatic assumption of authority over all people in a given area.

Practical reality is the present institutions do not foster peace and CANNOT as they derive their authority from coercion.

 

[Harrekin]

Thank you for asking.

The state forces association doesn't it? So if you agree that people have property rights, then nobody can (or should) own them, that would include an institution such as a state/nation that derives its "members" from an automatic assumption of authority over all people in a given area.

Practical reality is the present institutions do not foster peace and CANNOT as they derive their authority from coercion.

But how for example could you disassociate from the state, but expect use of state facilities, like cops or firemen?

 

[Rob Roy]

Impractical for example in the sense that disassociation in taxation but the expectation of use of public facilities, like roads for example.

Regulations stifle the advancement of alternative forms of transportation.

Also roads would exist absent a coercive government, until the free market renders them obsolete or low volume. Flying cars come to mind as one thing that would solve that problem.

The trick is to unbind the goods and services from the bads and disservices that government brings.

 

[Rob Roy]

But how for example could you disassociate from the state, but expect use of state facilities, like cops or firemen?

I don't expect to use them, in a free society the coercive state cannot exist. Logic dictates that.


If some of the things they do are wanted by consumers, the free ,market (once unchained) will provide those services in ways that give people alternatives rather than no alternative.

 

[Harrekin]

Regulations stifle the advancement of alternative forms of transportation.

Also roads would exist absent a coercive government, until the free market renders them obsolete or low volume. Flying cars come to mind as one thing that would solve that problem.

The trick is to unbind the goods and services from the bads and disservices that government brings.

So youre main gripe isnt so much with the idea of the "state" but more with the way it is currently run?

I think we're getting more on the same page, but I disagree that certain services should be removed from state auspices, they should simply be run more efficiently.

 

[darrellduaner]

Impractical for example in the sense that disassociation in taxation but the expectation of use of public facilities, like roads for example.

but what about the deadbeats that use public facilities now?
btw, what exactly is the "state"?

 

[Rob Roy]

robroy is totally not racist, but if a blackperson tries to buy gas at his gas station, he might as well be getting forcefully and violently raped by an aggressive black person.

You see how you are? If I had a gas station I'd not refuse customers based on race. You try so hard to back up your ideas, but then when your stamina wanes you go right back to trying to reconfigure what a person says. That makes you sort of a bad debater.

I am comparing initiating aggression to initiating aggression. In both instances, forcing one person to use their property as you want them to and in rape, I disapprove. You do not.

Did you swallow a box of chocolate covered gerbils covered in ellipses jimmies or what?

 

[Harrekin]

but what about the deadbeats that use public facilities now?
btw, what exactly is the "state"?

Deadbeats should be eliminated from the system to make way for genuine people who need temporary use of them.

It would also free up cash in the the form of tax cuts and increased revenue from people being forced to work.

Removing red tape for starting your own business/making education more accessable is another way to reduce welfare lines.

 

[Harrekin]

You see how you are? If I had a gas station I'd not refuse customers based on race. You try so hard to back up your ideas, but then when your stamina wanes you go right back to trying to reconfigure what a person says. That makes you sort of a bad debater.

I am comparing initiating aggression to initiating aggression. In both instances, forcing one person to use their property as you want them to and in rape, I disapprove. You do not.

Did you swallow a box of chocolate covered gerbils covered in ellipses jimmies or what?

If your gas station was near that racist gas station, you'd be doing even more business...

Win-Win from my perspective.

 

[Rob Roy]

If your gas station was near that racist gas station, you'd be doing even more business...

Win-Win from my perspective.

The free market wins again.

 

[londonfog]

If your gas station was near that racist gas station, you'd be doing even more business...

Win-Win from my perspective.

then the racist gas station would burn yours down because your business is doing better.

 

[londonfog]

The free market wins again.

WOW ..I guess you do believe in segregation

 

[Harrekin]

The free market wins again.

Business 101 for the Un-Retarded:

"If youve got money, Im selling"

 

[Rob Roy]

but what about the deadbeats that use public facilities now?
btw, what exactly is the "state"?

The state is a group of parasites bent on control over others.

Sometimes they give a little candy, but in order to get the candy they first have to steal it from someone.

 

[Harrekin]

WOW ..I guess you do believe in segregation

I wouldnt buy something in a store than didnt allow someone based on race, gender, etc.

Would you?

They wouldnt last long, not today.

 

[darrellduaner]

I wouldnt buy something in a store than didnt allow someone based on race, gender, etc.

Would you?

They wouldnt last long, not today.

i dont think anyone would, but would you and all your buddies kick in the door and demand that the store owner sell to everyone?
some jackass wrote once: "
AN ACT OF RESPECT WHEN DEMANDED BECOMES AN ACT OF SUBMISSION"