indiana

[WeedFreak78]

The constitution was written by wealthy land and slave owners in plain English so anyone can understand it, but it won't apply to blacks, Indians, Asians..oh F-it, no one but white Europeans.

FIFY. If you believe the tripe that was spoon fed to you about our "founding fathers" being hard working farmers, blacksmiths,etc. you need to go back to school. They were the equivalent of todays Koch brothers or George Soros. Big money who wanted to control politics. They had no interest in equality of man, but without that spin do you think the actual hands in the dirt working class would support them? Who would have ended up being punished harder by the British had the colonists lost..a handful of revolutionaries..who probably would have been put to immediate death..or the "peasants" who now live under the kings rule and were supporters of the insurrection?

 

[schuylaar]

FIFY. If you believe the tripe that was spoon fed to you about our "founding fathers" being hard working farmers, blacksmiths,etc. you need to go back to school. They were the equivalent of todays Koch brothers or George Soros. Big money who wanted to control politics. They had no interest in equality of man, but without that spin do you think the actual hands in the dirt working class would support them? Who would have ended up being punished harder by the British had the colonists lost..a handful of revolutionaries..who probably would have been put to immediate death..or the "peasants" who now live under the kings rule and were supporters of the insurrection?

same as it ever was.
~talking heads

 

[OddBall1st]

oven.

reusable resources,....clever...

 

[Rob Roy]

Because he is a piece of shit human who has no business being a father, or a role model.

I think you've failed to realize that my promoting voluntary and consensual relationships is a good thing. You've also demonstrated the conversation is above your comprehension and that you are a rude person.

You are free to misconstrue and continue to illustrate your ignorance of how unintended consequences arise when non defensive force used as a means is backed by good intentions feed not from voluntary interactions, rather flowing from that same improper means.

In other words, you can't beat peace into somebody or force people to interact and still achieve peace. Peace.

 

[Rob Roy]

did some small children finally "consent" to be paid by you in exchange for whatever sick shit you're gonna do to them, spaMBLA?

I think in all of your idiocy the one you do the best is to strawman the other guys point of view.

You really should consider going into government, you possess many of the necessary traits. You like to run other peoples lives for them. You don't listen to what they are saying and you're full of yourself and like to shit on other people and their property.
Among people that can't reason for themselves you might even pass for intelligent.

You no doubt have some redeeming qualities and likely feed your gerbils well as long they do your bidding. So you could pull off the phony act when needed.

Of course you could just be an asshole so eager to point out your moral superiority that you are willing to use violence to try to create peace.

 

[Rob Roy]

Why do you consider me offering money to someone who is openly offering a public service an act of aggression, Rob?

An "offer that can't be refused" is not a real offer. It is a threat and a strong arm tactic. When people interact, if the glue that holds the interaction together is based in a threat....it is impossible for the interaction to be consensual.

I don't think I have the right to force anyone to interact with me on their own property if they prefer not to. If I make them interact with me, I become the aggressor, that is self evident. Since if I never went to THEIR property in the first place, no forced interaction will have taken place as long as they are remaining on THEIR property.

Also, those people that don't want to interact with you, they are not "openly offering" to interact with you. They are not consenting to interact with you, they are only doing so to prevent the non owner of the property (government) from harming them. That is also self evident.

If you believe you have a right to control your own body and your own property, it also becomes self evident other people do to.
What they do with it, is another story and it isn't necessary to the protection of your right to control yourself to violate their right to control themselves or their own property.


I appreciate your asking questions and refraining from saying my recognition of a bigots rights to control his own property is not my endorsement of how he would control it. They are two distinctly separate things.

 

[Rob Roy]

How could you disgrace your gay son like this, Rob? Why do you respect these bigoted cunts, and piss on your gay sons basic human rights?

My sons basic human rights certainly include his right to make his own choices about how he controls his OWN body, his OWN property and makes his own choices about who he consensually associates with. Nobody should take those rights away from him.

Those rights are not unique to him though....if everyone else has those rights, and they should. It must mean none of us has the right to make those choices for others as well.

I can not like what other people do with their OWN things, but also still realize if I force them to interact with me, or serve me etc. I've just tossed out the window the statements I mentioned above.

My son has no right to force an interaction, none of us do.

 

[Grandpapy]

So if you sold gasoline in lets say NOLA, and a Hurricane forced evacuation of all souls.
You could have the power between life and death. Seems fair.
Need a heart or liver transplant? Drive on. Oh, you need gas? Drive on.

Please don't start selling anything that can save my life.

 

[Rob Roy]

So if you sold gasoline in lets say NOLA, and a Hurricane forced evacuation of all souls.
You could have the power between life and death. Seems fair.
Need a heart or liver transplant? Drive on. Oh, you need gas? Drive on.

Please don't start selling anything that can save my life.

I'll assume you directed this post to me.

A question for you....

Do you think you own your own body or do you think other people do?

 

[Rob Roy]

No, because as I already explained, enforcing equal protection under the law is not forcing people to interact, it's ensuring people simply can't act in a way that will lead to violence

How is a person being violent by attempting to control their OWN body and not the body of others?

Isn't the person forcefully insisting on an interaction the one relying on violence as his means to an end?

I'd really like to hear how you respond to those questions.


The law isn't providing equal protection. It takes away the right of one party to exercise self determination and allows another party to create an interaction on a nonconsensual basis. This is not an opinion, its a fact, evidenced by the fact for something to be consensual, it requires the assent of BOTH parties.

A proper law would be to simply remove forced segregation and let those that wish to interact, interact.

 

[Grandpapy]

I'll assume you directed this post to me.

A question for you....

Do you think you own your own body or do you think other people do?

Sorry @Rob Roy It was more directed at those not as sympathetic/or forgiving as you.

As for your question, It would be a matter of perspective. (as in your position in society.)

A Question for you.....In the absence of Society, would the Earth care if you own your body?

 

[Rob Roy]

Sorry @Rob Roy It was more directed at those not as sympathetic/or forgiving as you.

As for your question, It would be a matter of perspective. (as in your position in society.)

A Question for you.....In the absence of Society, would the Earth care if you own your body?

Thank you for the clarification.

The earth will eventually own my body, until then I will advocate for a peaceful society where all individuals own their own bodies, but not the body of others.

 

[Grandpapy]

Thank you for the clarification.

The earth will eventually own my body, until then I will advocate for a peaceful society where all individuals own their own bodies, but not the body of others.

This is a wonderful thought.

But the words of my babysitter ring in my head, "grow up, the world's not fair, now go to bed!"

 

[UncleBuck]

I think in all of your idiocy the one you do the best is to strawman the other guys point of view.

You really should consider going into government, you possess many of the necessary traits. You like to run other peoples lives for them. You don't listen to what they are saying and you're full of yourself and like to shit on other people and their property.
Among people that can't reason for themselves you might even pass for intelligent.

You no doubt have some redeeming qualities and likely feed your gerbils well as long they do your bidding. So you could pull off the phony act when needed.

Of course you could just be an asshole so eager to point out your moral superiority that you are willing to use violence to try to create peace.

sorry for pointing out once again that you think pedophilia is voluntary and consensual, spaMBLA.

 

[UncleBuck]

An "offer that can't be refused" is not a real offer. It is a threat and a strong arm tactic. When people interact, if the glue that holds the interaction together is based in a threat....it is impossible for the interaction to be consensual.

I don't think I have the right to force anyone to interact with me on their own property if they prefer not to. If I make them interact with me, I become the aggressor, that is self evident. Since if I never went to THEIR property in the first place, no forced interaction will have taken place as long as they are remaining on THEIR property.

Also, those people that don't want to interact with you, they are not "openly offering" to interact with you. They are not consenting to interact with you, they are only doing so to prevent the non owner of the property (government) from harming them. That is also self evident.

If you believe you have a right to control your own body and your own property, it also becomes self evident other people do to.
What they do with it, is another story and it isn't necessary to the protection of your right to control yourself to violate their right to control themselves or their own property.


I appreciate your asking questions and refraining from saying my recognition of a bigots rights to control his own property is not my endorsement of how he would control it. They are two distinctly separate things.

for the tenth time, racistroy, who is forced to open a public store rather than a private one?

for the thirteenth time, what is the most peaceful way to kick someone out of a store because of their skin color?

 

[UncleBuck]

My sons basic human rights certainly include his right to make his own choices about how he controls his OWN body, his OWN property and makes his own choices about who he consensually associates with. Nobody should take those rights away from him.

Those rights are not unique to him though....if everyone else has those rights, and they should. It must mean none of us has the right to make those choices for others as well.

I can not like what other people do with their OWN things, but also still realize if I force them to interact with me, or serve me etc. I've just tossed out the window the statements I mentioned above.

My son has no right to force an interaction, none of us do.

why do you think your son should only have access to a smaller set of goods and services, higher prices, and lower competition than i get just because i am straight and he is gay?

is it because you hate your gays son, or because you won't allow your gay son to interfere with your regimen of bigotry, exclusion, and hatred?

 

[UncleBuck]

How is a person being violent by attempting to control their OWN body and not the body of others?.

before civil rights was passed, could blacks travel freely through the south?

 

[Padawanbater2]

A proper law would be to simply remove forced segregation and let those that wish to interact, interact.

What law states people are forced to integrate?

 

[Grandpapy]

What law states people are forced to integrate?

Law of nature in order to multiply.........

 

[Grandpapy]

This is a wonderful thought.

But the words of my babysitter ring in my head, "grow up, the world's not fair, now go to bed!"

Edit: @Rob Roy re-reading this sounded belittling, it was not my intent.