Fogdog
Well-Known Member
She did, but it was just luck.
Indictment Countdown...
- Thread starter NLXSK1
- Start date
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
No, I don't think you are an asshole for telling everybody to read a book before they are qualified to discuss Hillary Clinton for Prez. I think you are a bit grandiose to think we will. But you are completely within your rights to say "this is a great book and contains a lot of really good information that is pertinent to this discussion. It's too complex for me to go over it in this discussion but I'd recommend reading it if you are interested in this stuff". That's how I interpreted your post and I got a little snarky with you probably unfairly. So for that, I apologize.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
londonfog
Well-Known Member
oxymoron
Michael Huntherz
Well-Known Member
Nah dude, I'm a pain in the ass, but I do mean well. No worries on my end, I was on a tear yesterday.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Your statement is a diversion and proves my point, you are afraid of a real debate.
The only people who can consent to anything, are those who possess the wherewithal to consent to whatever is the subject and those that do consent for the consent to be valid, must do so absent any duress. That's not a "right wing extremist view" , it's a statement based in logic. You and your tribe of jackals have had fun trying to turn that into other things, but my foregoing statements are irrefutable.
I think you are afraid to discuss what property is, because to do so, you'd have to defend your ideas, which seem inconsistently applied.
Whatever "liberty" is or isn't, it doesn't involve a third party forcibly arranging for the segregation of people who wish to interact or forcibly making people interact when one or both prefer not to. You can't refute what I just said, or you would, but you can conflate it and often do.
Here, this is for you....
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
A child consenting to sex with a adult is not liberty. It's rape. Why do you want to make it legal for Adults to fuck children?
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Putting aside your monumental dullardness for a moment, I'll ask you to read again what I just posted and you quoted. It seems you have failed to grasp the full meaning.
If a person doesn't possess the wherewithal to consent, but makes an agreement without an understanding of the circumstances, their inability to comprehend negates that the consent is valid.
If a person does possess the ability to consent, what they consent to, whether it is noble or heinous is a secondary item, and doesn't erase their ability to have made an agreement.
I do believe the younger a person is, the less likely they have developed the ability to consent.
Also, you believe it's okay to take actions against people even if they haven't consented to your actions. That's a rapist tactic you advocate, Prohibitionist. You want to create legislation which removes consent and replaces it with force. That is irrefutable.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
So when you repeat incessantly, "what is property and who can own it" what you actually mean is that you would like for me to explain anarchism to you since you have never bothered to educate yourself on one of the most well theorized political philosophies in history.
Have you noticed that I have never asked you to explain anything about this bullshit oxymoron called anarchocapitalism that you ascribe to?
The reason for that is that I know more about it than you do. It is you that is afraid to defend your ideas as they are under constant attack, because they are literally made by the capitalist ruling class in order to appeal to idiots and you gobble them up, hook line and sinker. Your only recourse is to deflect into a weak and misguided segue about something else, of which you have no understanding.
So when you say that I am afraid to debate you, you could not be more wrong. You're a glob-fly and I'm Commander Warf, wielding a bat'leth in your face while you have not brought anything new to this forum in years.
When you distort every point I just made, I will know you're terrified and butt hurt of a real debate and prefer to keep it within the scope of your pedophilia and racism.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
This post shows that after reading Rob Roy for years you still dont understand the basics of his position.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
No, but your post shows how desperate you are to make a friend on this forum.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
No it doesn't. You just have nothing worthwhile to present. By all means though, ask me again what property is, since you don't know.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
Really? The capitalist ruling class believes that their class needs to be dismantled because they have siezed power that legally cannot be designated to themselves.
Are they going to do this out of white guilt?
Seriously, the paragraph you posted has almost no basis in reality. I call it like I see it.
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
What's white guilt other than a dog whistle for white supremacists?
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Yeah, you're laughably stupid, to the point where responding to you is somewhat embarrassing, and only gives you credibility, however, I enjoy trolling mouthbreathing shitloaves. So where to begin...
First off, that was @ChesusRice who replied to you, not me.
Secondly, according to me what? Seriously guy, learn to read.
Thirdly, while we're on the subject of your extremely low intelligence, It is pertinent to point out that your support for Trump is fully in perspective.
Carry on.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
You got me... Didnt realize both tweedle dumb and tweedle dee were online tag teaming me this morning... Blame it on the Marijuana.
You didnt answer the question.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
You never asked a coherent question.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
Rob Roy proposes freedom from government and rulers.
You said in your post that this comes from the capitalist ruling class.
Could you explain the discrepancy?