Calling All Racists..... a new vacation destination

Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
You got Amish written all over you Rob Roy Miller...now off to the Midwest you go.
Click to expand...
Actually that's your mothers phone number written on my forearm, she didn't have a piece of paper



londonfog said:
My goal is to assure that we don't go back to the past. Rob Roy Miller and others want that to happen. Feel Civil Rights are not needed.
Click to expand...

Your goal can never be met, if you employ the same tactics (force) that were used in the past. Dizzy yet? You should be.

The term "civil rights" is oxymoronic. It first strips a right from all individuals to freely determine their human interactions on a consensual basis and replaces that right with an edict that threatens force if people do not comply with a forced association they would not freely choose. Rape much?


How does threatening force against a peaceful person further your goals?

I know you can't and won't answer my question because you are caught in a contradiction and you have a slight comprehension problem. That's why it's easier to talk about Amish beards and shit like that.
 
Yessica...

Yessica...

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Actually that's your mothers phone number written on my forearm, she didn't have a piece of paper






Your goal can never be met, if you employ the same tactics (force) that were used in the past. Dizzy yet? You should be.

The term "civil rights" is oxymoronic. It first strips a right from all individuals to freely determine their human interactions on a consensual basis and replaces that right with an edict that threatens force if people do not comply with a forced association they would not freely choose. Rape much?


How does threatening force against a peaceful person further your goals?

I know you can't and won't answer my question because you are caught in a contradiction and you have a slight comprehension problem. That's why it's easier to talk about Amish beards and shit like that.
Click to expand...
bahahahahahahahahahahahaha

That's good.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
wait, i thought you said you would choose to serve black people if you owned a business.

now you're saying that you have to be forced against your will to serve black people?

that doesn't make any sense.
Click to expand...

If I owned a business I would trade with those that I chose to and that also agreed to trade with me. I would exclude some people, but their race would not be the determinant.

For instance a person that shit on the floor of the bathroom at my business, would not be welcome. Sorry, I hope you understand that means you.

I don't respond well to people trying to force me to do things, so if somebody came to my business, say a prohibitionist lap dog like you, a KKK dickhead, a race card whiner or a gerbil posing as a dope grower and told me I must serve them or engage in some kind of trade, I'd probably tell them to shit in their hat.

What doesn't make sense is your cognitive dissonance. You think by using force as the primary ingredient in a plan, you can also make the plan just and remove inequity.....that's dumb....very dumb.
 
skunkd0c

skunkd0c

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
If I owned a business I would trade with those that I chose to and that also agreed to trade with me. I would exclude some people, but their race would not be the determinant.

For instance a person that shit on the floor of the bathroom at my business, would not be welcome. Sorry, I hope you understand that means you.

I don't respond well to people trying to force me to do things, so if somebody came to my business, say a prohibitionist lap dog like you, a KKK dickhead, a race card whiner or a gerbil posing as a dope grower and told me I must serve them or engage in some kind of trade, I'd probably tell them to shit in their hat.

What doesn't make sense is your cognitive dissonance. You think by using force as the primary ingredient in a plan, you can also make the plan just and remove inequity.....that's dumb....very dumb.
Click to expand...
do you have to give up any rights as an individual that you would have when at home
if you enter into the public to trade with others ?
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
that has nothing to do with your love of "freedom of choice".

i wanted you to tell me all about the "freedom of choice" that blacks got to enjoy before civil rights.
Click to expand...


Blacks had limited options when the coercive government made laws that restricted their choices of association, such as who they could marry etc.

So in order to "correct" this, the coercive government did the exact wrong thing, which was to force people to associate even if some people preferred not to.

When people are forced to associate it is just the other side of the coin that says they can't associate.

Coercive government "SOLUTIONS"= nobody wins!!! Hooray!!!



I think human interactions should be determined by the parties interacting, not you, not me or any other party that is not part of the interaction. You don't. That makes you an advocate for forcing peaceful or indifferent people to do things they don't want to....rapist.
 
Last edited:
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
skunkd0c said:
do you have to give up any rights as an individual that you would have when at home
if you enter into the public to trade with others ?
Click to expand...

Two ways to answer that.

In the present legal scheme, the law does first take away a persons right of self determination.

There is no such thing as "public trade". That is a created fiction. When we trade with people it involves an exchange with an individual, not the public in general.

I believe all exchanges in order to be just, must be free of coercion. Do you?
 
Last edited:
skunkd0c

skunkd0c

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Two ways to answer that.

In the present legal scheme, the law does first take away a persons right of self determination.

There is no such thing as "public trade". That is a created fiction. When we trade with people it involves an exchange with an individual, not the public in general.

I believe all exchanges to be just, must be free of coercion. Do you?
Click to expand...
i do not have a answer sorry, only questions .. thoughts
when you use the government money system to trade with i would assume you need to abide by certain laws that would forbid you to exclude trade from
certain people based on race or whatever

where if you were at home you could exclude from your home whomever you wanted based on race or whatever criteria you choose
everyone has the right to be a racist at home if they wish, but when trading in public i would assume the law forbids this

for example if i opened a cake shop and i erected a sign that said

fairy cakes for white people £1.00 each
fairy cakes for black people £2.00 each

i do not think this would be allowed .. but should it be ?
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
skunkd0c said:
i do not have a answer sorry, only questions .. thoughts
when you use the government money system to trade with i would assume you need to abide by certain laws that would forbid you to exclude trade from
certain people based on race or whatever

where if you were at home you could exclude from your home whomever you wanted based on race or whatever criteria you choose
everyone has the right to be a racist at home if they wish, but when trading in public i would assume the law forbids this

for example if i opened a cake shop and i erected a sign that said

fairy cakes for white people £1.00 each
fairy cakes for black people £2.00 each

i do not think this would be allowed .. but should it be ?
Click to expand...

First of all thank you for the questions.

Price negotiation should be between the engaged and equally willing parties, not disinterested parties and especially not by a coercive government.


Laws do not determine morality, they only promise punishment for disobedience.
 
skunkd0c

skunkd0c

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
First of all thank you for the questions.

Price negotiation should be between the engaged and equally willing parties, not disinterested parties and especially not by a coercive government.


Laws do not determine morality, they only promise punishment for disobedience.
Click to expand...
this kind of thing ^^ happened in Ireland .. the Catholics were not happy about it since they were on the receiving end

it saddens me to say this but many people have been dehumanized by government/societies teachings
many people are more brutal than government
left to people themselves i'm certain the punishment for disobedience would be equally as harmful if not more violent

i do not feel any solidarity towards other unknown individuals or government, they are both potential threats

how does your point work the other way round from the point of view of a worker not a seller or buyer?
for example
if government does not set standards of some kind it would be legal for white folk to work for £2 per day ?
and black folk to work for £1 per day .. as long as both parties agree ?
 
DonAlejandroVega

DonAlejandroVega

Well-Known Member
skunkd0c said:
this kind of thing ^^ happened in Ireland .. the Catholics were not happy about it since they were on the receiving end

it saddens me to say this but many people have been dehumanized by government/societies teachings
many people are more brutal than government
left to people themselves i'm certain the punishment for disobedience would be equally as harmful if not more violent

i do not feel any solidarity towards other unknown individuals or government, they are both potential threats

how does your point work the other way round from the point of view of a worker not a seller or buyer?
for example
if government does not set standards of some kind it would be legal for white folk to work for £2 per day ?
and black folk to work for £1 per day .. as long as both parties agree ?
Click to expand...
people who dehumanize others are nothing but animals..............
 
sheskunk

sheskunk

Well-Known Member
If civil rights were to be abolished would the racists win? Would people immediately start buying and selling slaves? Would we really go back to the way it was?

This whole conversation is ridiculous.
 
SmokeyDan

SmokeyDan

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
i'd rather fuck neither.
Click to expand...
I don't actually have a sister, so it is a completely hypothetical situation for me, and i don't fully understand the brother/sister dynamic, but I can't imagine any semi-normal vagina I'd turn down in favor of a dude.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top