A civil debate?

Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
InigoMontoya said:
Legal implications of?..
Click to expand...
I remember being 16 once too. I got better, hope you do too.

Well for one thing, your spouse can make life or death decisions for you if you are medically incapacitated. Also there is a matter of joint property. Go away and come back when you reach 18. I have no desire to be civil with you. You may interpret this as my having inferior logic or have fuzzy, poorly defined beliefs. I do not give a fuck what you think. I have "argued" these points with better than you a thousand times and my patience for it has long ago expired.
 
PCXV

PCXV

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
The people have a right to determine the MISUSE of THEIR property, which can easily be traced to the radioactive waste dumper.

I notice you aren't addressing any of my questions.

Do you think people should be able to control their OWN property and body and NOT the body and property of others ?
Click to expand...
Nice mental gymnastics. The neighorhood isn't misusing their own property. To stop the nuclear waste they have to have a say in the nuclear waste business's property. That is some people trying to control another person's property.

I addressed your questions and asked for clarification. How many are having their houses seized? Define rights when you ask if some have more than others.

I see a lot of empty platitudes from you with no specifics and no solution but the empty platitudes themselves. It's as if libertarians have no concept of logistics.

Also, @OP, see how Rob Roy Moore has to repeatedly whine about me not addressing his vague questions (walked back from "assertions")? He does this habitually so that at the end of the conversation he can claim that none of his ideas were challenged fairly, and that the other side runs from his bullshit because they can't prove him wrong. It is obvious projection as every argument be makes is clearly, directly addressed while he ignores the opposition's legitimate arguments and reverts back to empty platitudes. Hypocritical victim bullshit very similar to religious dogma.
 
Last edited:
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
PCXV said:
Nice mental gymnastics. The neighorhood isn't misusing their own property. To stop the nuclear waste they have to have a say in the nuclear waste business's property. That is some people trying to control another person's property.

I addressed your questions and asked for clarification. How many are having their houses seized? Define rights when you ask if some have more than others.

I see a lot of empty platitudes from you with no specifics and no solution but the empty platitudes themselves. It's as if libertarians have no concept of logistics.

Also, @OP, see how Rob Roy Moore has to repeatedly whine about me not addressing his vague questions (walked back from "assertions")? He does this habitually so that at the end of the conversation he can claim that none of his ideas were challenged fairly, and that the other side runs from his bullshit because they can't prove him wrong. It is obvious projection as every argument be makes is clearly, directly addressed while he ignores the opposition's legitimate arguments and reverts back to empty platitudes. Hypocritical victim bullshit very similar to religious dogma.
Click to expand...
I didn't say the neighborhood was misusing their property doofus, I said the person who is creating the radioactive waste is misusing their property, which he has no right to do.

Which would mean the radioactive generating person isn't controlling just his property any longer, he is violating the property right of whoever suffered damage, as in other peoples property.

Do you find it odd that you correctly identify the wrongfulness when a radioactive waste generator abuses others property, but you seem fine with going to someone else property and forcing them to serve you?
 
PCXV

PCXV

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
I didn't say the neighborhood was misusing their property doofus, I said the person who is creating the radioactive waste is misusing their property, which he has no right to do.

Which would mean the radioactive generating person isn't controlling just his property any longer, he is violating the property right of whoever suffered damage, as in other peoples property.

Do you find it odd that you correctly identify the wrongfulness when a radioactive waste generator abuses others property, but you seem fine with going to someone else property and forcing them to serve you?
Click to expand...
What authority can declare he is misusing his property? Why does he care if it harms the people downstream? What right do they have to say what he is doing is wrong and the use of his property should change?
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
PCXV said:
What authority can declare he is misusing his property? Why does he care if it harms the people downstream? What right do they have to say what he is doing is wrong and the use of his property should change?
Click to expand...
So is this gonna be one of those things where I answer your questions and you run away from mine?
 
Unclebaldrick

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
I didn't say the neighborhood was misusing their property doofus, I said the person who is creating the radioactive waste is misusing their property, which he has no right to do.

Which would mean the radioactive generating person isn't controlling just his property any longer, he is violating the property right of whoever suffered damage, as in other peoples property.

Do you find it odd that you correctly identify the wrongfulness when a radioactive waste generator abuses others property, but you seem fine with going to someone else property and forcing them to serve you?
Click to expand...
But refusing to serve black customers does them no harm? Lol.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
PCXV said:
Which questions have I run away from?

Really interested to see what authority you are appealing to in my hypothetical.
Click to expand...


Do you think people should be able to control their OWN property and body and NOT the body and property of others ?


Unclebaldrick said:
But refusing to serve black customers does them no harm? Lol.
Click to expand...
You're a little late to the party Mr, Potato Head. It's not about black customers. It's about any individual of any race being able to decide whether or not they will control their own property and their own body.

If you only view it the way you framed it, you might be assuming "the white man's burden"
and be a racist. Are you okay with the idea black people should be forced to serve white people even when they remain on their own property and prefer not to associate with a white person etc. ?
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
PCXV said:
What authority can declare he is misusing his property? Why does he care if it harms the people downstream? What right do they have to say what he is doing is wrong and the use of his property should change?
Click to expand...

I meant the radioactive waste dumper is misusing OTHER PEOPLES property.

People care when they are incentivized to care or sometimes because they are nice people.

Your last question seems to be a misunderstanding of my meaning, refer to my first line in the post for clarification. You're welcome.
 
PCXV

PCXV

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Do you think people should be able to control their OWN property and body and NOT the body and property of others?
Click to expand...
Not in absolute. I think people should be able to control their property to a reasonable extent, only limited by the rights of others and in accordance with laws made of the people, by the people, and for the people. This compromise of absolute freedom affords civility, order, and prosperity for all.

Rob Roy said:
I meant the radioactive waste dumper is misusing OTHER PEOPLES property.

People care when they are incentivized to care or sometimes because they are nice people.

Your last question seems to be a misunderstanding of my meaning, refer to my first line in the post for clarification. You're welcome.
Click to expand...
How is he misusing other people's property? By what authority is that claim enforcable to make him stop?

Who owns the river? He is upstream and claims to own the river, or at least his section of it. Radioactive waste is drifting down the stream from his property onto others, is it his fault they put there property downstream before he built his plant? What is his incentive to care? What right do the people have downstream to make him stop? How will they enforce it?

Face it, he is misusing his property and your position is that there should be no government to tell him he can't use his property the way he wants, the people downstream don't have that right either.

Now apply this to many scenarios. I claim private ownership of a watersource, say the great lakes. It's my property, so no water will be funneled to the SW, no swimming, no boating, no drinking, no irrigation, it is now just a dump site for my garbage company. Who has a right to say I am misusing my property? Afterall, I have absolute control over my property, right?
 
Last edited:
zeddd

zeddd

Well-Known Member
InigoMontoya said:
Pretty sure Jesus would just shake his head and face palm at everybody

I've already stated my opinions on same sex marriage and abortion. I'm actually from Colorado, I was born in a little mexican ghetto and I've been around poverty my whole life. As far as that goes funny thing my wife and son both depend on government medical programs. I almost lost my shit when I read that. You assume I know nothing about struggle? I've never seen the shit side of life? I paced around a hospital while my wife lost a child because of all that insurance shit so I better not hear one more fucking word about that. How have democrats actually helped though? They talk and talk but never do anything. Obama talked at us for eight years and nothing is better. Inner cities aren't better off, schools aren't better off, our country isn't better off. After obamacare do you know how hard it is to find a doctor to take my wife and son? Almost every doctor worth going to stopped taking our shit. You assume that I'm some priveleged and naive child puts me over the edge. Yeah I don't think it's up to the government I think it's up to us. What are you doing for those poor people who need medicine? I used my car as a taxi to get mexicans with no cars to work, I used my influence with my bosses to get mexicans with no jobs jobs. And when I get an elk at least 150 lbs. of meat go to those poor families that I must not give a shit about.
Click to expand...
Tldr
 
PCXV

PCXV

Well-Known Member
@Rob Roy , you almost made me forget a question you avoided, sly dog. How many houses are seized each year by the government? I assume you meant because of property taxes? Just curious.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top