Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Did you answer what property is and who can own it? When?
Did you answer what is a voluntary interaction and what isn't? When?
You haven't answered my questions. You've deflected again.
vermont proposes latin state motto
- Thread starter UncleBuck
- Start date
Did you answer what property is and who can own it? When?
Did you answer what is a voluntary interaction and what isn't? When?
You haven't answered my questions. You've deflected again.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Sniffing the fumes from a gerbils ass has you talking gibberish again.
I'll attempt to decipher what you said.
My name is Uncle Buck and I have no ability to debate reasonably so when cornered I go the absurd. I will use strawmen, deflection and false allegations as my main tools, sprinkling in a healthy amount of stupidity and bulbousness. When that fails, I will shit on a floor and then search the sky for penis clouds. I also like peanut butter and jelly sandwiches that the bad man makes for me.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
yes, both, about a day ago
yes, about a day ago
maybe quit defending racial segregation so vigorously and comparing everything to rape and you'll be less stupid
inb4 this post is compared to rape
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
You are defending forced interactions. I am not.
How does my wanting the individuals involved to decide the nature of their relationship constitute an endorsement of what has been decided? Please answer that.
Also, in which of your posts did you define what property is and who can own it?
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
you are defending racial discrimination because you're a racist.
you also describe pedophilia as consensual.
inb4 my veteran's disability is compared to rape
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I am defending your right to control your own body and your own property, but not the body or property of another. I apply that universally to all people. Race is not the issue, nor is gender or sexual preference.
You have erroneously extrapolated my points into other things. I am not a racist, I think it is nonsensical to like or dislike somebody based on race. I view people as individuals and judge them on their actions.
When you sit all day in your mothers basement you should be able to think anything you want to. However when you travel on stolen funds to shit on other people who are remaining on their own property and insist that they behave as you would have them behave even while they remain on their own property, you become the aggressor. That is self evident. You are afraid to argue that point, in fact you run from it.
My argument is that all people have the right to defend themselves and the right to determine the use of their OWN property. If they don't , it is no longer their property.
Who owns your property, you or somebody else is the question you are afraid to answer.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
but if white store owners have to sell things to black people, here come the rape comparisons
inb4 my veteran's disability is compared to rape
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I think when people interact on a consensual basis rape is not present.
When people use force to make others do things they are not inclined to do, "rape" is more likely.
Logically if you own something and I take it from you, let's say the right to control your own body or property, absent your permission, I am committing an act of aggression.
Committing an act of initiating aggression, is not abandoning conflict, it is initiating conflict.
Also, why are you so afraid to have your beliefs examined? Why do you believe that it is okay to make people interact if one party would rather not and that party remains on their own property?
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
i doubt there is even one person who gives a shit what our resident anarchocapitalist thinks
dude seriously, i'm not getting tired of making a fool of you
a senile fungus
Well-Known Member
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
well, a pile of horridly unfunny insult is almost the same as an answer.
you have said before that if a person can't tell people to leave their store because of their skin color, then they do not own that store, and you compared it to slavery and rape.
so if a person can't use their gun to shoot small children, do they really own that gun, or are they a slave who is being raped?
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
You might want to learn more about what the non-initiation of aggression principle really is. I'm a little tired of you for now. Peace.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
What is property and who can own it?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
what would be the most peaceful, least aggressive way to kick someone out of your store based on their skin color?
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Okay, let's try putting that question another way.
Which is the most peaceful way to force somebody to interact with you, if they would rather not and that person is remaining on their own property?
Perspective, Meathead, perspective.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
waaaah, you never answer my questions...
let's put this question another way...
inb4 civil rights are compared to rape
let's put this question another way...
inb4 civil rights are compared to rape
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
unclebuck, perspective meathead...
you have to stick your head up your ass to gain his perspective
you have to stick your head up your ass to gain his perspective
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
I am kicking your non-intellectual ass. That is evident by your lack of response to some specific questions.
what would be the most peaceful, least aggressive way to kick someone out of your store based on their skin color?
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I knew the crayons would make an appearance. That was thoughtful of you. You, even used green, my favorite color.
Except you're not kicking my ass, you never have.
I've already stated I wouldn't kick a person out of my store (if I had one) based on race. So, I can't answer how I'd do something,that I don't contemplate and haven't contemplated doing. I CAN answer how I would treat a person that did practice discrimination based on race when staying on their own property. I would not invade their property, nor would I associate with them if /when they left their property. Until, then, if they remain on their property, I would leave them alone and be peacefully indifferent to them. That would be much the same if I knew a person that shit on his own floor. I'd think what a fucking douche, but I wouldn't go into their property and demand they stop fowling the floor.
Same question for you now....
You advocate a person being able to force another person to associate with them, even if that person is remaining on their own property.
How would you invade another persons property and make them use their body to serve you, when they clearly prefer not to ? Which peaceful methods would you use to do what you advocate is acceptable?
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Similar threads
