Oscar flap 'ludicrous' and get rid of Black History Month

Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
In order to arrest a person, there should be a real crime that took place, not a statutory edict violation that has more to do with disobedience than a real crime...for starters.

No, you are confused. A cop has the POWER to arrest you, that isn't the same as a right.

A cop is a person, we already agreed that no people can delegate rights to another person which they themselves do not possess.

You keep spinning what happens as if it is legitimate, "because it's legal" .

All people have the right to defend themselves, no people have the right to use offensive force....even if they are cops.
A legislative power is not a right....learn the difference.


Here...enjoy....

View attachment 3595923
Click to expand...
"The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consent_of_the_governed
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
"The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consent_of_the_governed
Click to expand...


The argument you've presented for one person(s) or group (government) to rule another without the others consent, is tactically speaking the same one the mafia, rapists and thugs use.


How do you explain your contradiction ? First, you agree that nobody can delegate a right they do not possess, then you say it is possible as long as there are enough people doing the things you disapprove of.

Sounds like you've been fooled into obedience to authority so much that you are willing to go against your own beliefs. Very stockholm syndrome of you. I hope you come to your senses, and start to question your obedience training.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
The argument you've presented for one person(s) or group (government) to rule another without the others consent, is tactically speaking the same one the mafia, rapists and thugs use.

How do you explain your contradiction ? First, you agree that nobody can delegate a right they do not possess, then you say it is possible as long as there are enough people doing the things you disapprove of.
Click to expand...
I'm not going to argue the flaws of libertarian philosophy again, you want to highlight the pitfalls of modern society, and there are many, I myself point them out regularly, without acknowledging or accepting the flaws of libertarianism. You won't own up to or accept the fact that unlimited liberty is impossible to achieve without stepping on civil liberties and human/individual rights. So hoping to have any kind of reasonable discussion with you about it is unlikely and a waste of time.

Go ahead and tell me I can't rationalize your contradictions if it makes you feel better. You can't and never will attempt to answer to my criticisms of your ideal worldview, so until you do that, take care.
 
Not GOP

Not GOP

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
I'm not going to argue the flaws of libertarian philosophy again, you want to highlight the pitfalls of modern society, and there are many, I myself point them out regularly, without acknowledging or accepting the flaws of libertarianism. You won't own up to or accept the fact that unlimited liberty is impossible to achieve without stepping on civil liberties and human/individual rights. So hoping to have any kind of reasonable discussion with you about it is unlikely and a waste of time.

Go ahead and tell me I can't rationalize your contradictions if it makes you feel better. You can't and never will attempt to answer to my criticisms of your ideal worldview, so until you do that, take care.
Click to expand...
How about we call February cultural diversity and integration month? It sounds more inclusive
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
I'm not going to argue the flaws of libertarian philosophy again, you want to highlight the pitfalls of modern society, and there are many, I myself point them out regularly, without acknowledging or accepting the flaws of libertarianism. You won't own up to or accept the fact that unlimited liberty is impossible to achieve without stepping on civil liberties and human/individual rights. So hoping to have any kind of reasonable discussion with you about it is unlikely and a waste of time.

Go ahead and tell me I can't rationalize your contradictions if it makes you feel better. You can't and never will attempt to answer to my criticisms of your ideal worldview, so until you do that, take care.
Click to expand...

There's no need for me to highlite your contradictions, you did it very well yourself.

That doesn't make you unique though, most people hold opposing points of view and recoil and defend the contradiction when it is demonstrated to them using the values they proclaim to hold as an example.


Thank you, you take care as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top