![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|||||||
| Philosophy investigation of truths, knowledge and concerns of existence |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
It ironic that those who are most likely oppose legislation of morality are often likely to support legitimization of immorality (such as confiscating the resoures of an unfavored group to distribute those resources to a favored one).
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
It is also ironic that those same individuals will justify such confiscation on moral grounds.
|
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
anyone who will confiscate your enemy's property will then be willing to come after your's: taxes are a form of theft - by legal means the Government robs your every paycheck.
since in the Constitution taxes were supposed to be "temporary and voluntary" and we all know that taxes are neither of those things in the real world. Tax is just confiscation by other means. |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
The problem with government temporary solutions is they tend to become permanent problems.
|
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
I think there is a distinct difference between legislating human behavior and legislating consequences. For example, drinking alcohol is a human behavior. It should be left alone. That is why prohibition did not work. However, if this same person engages in a behavior that affects others, then it becomes something different. To drive drunk, and take someone's life in the process, is to infringe on their liberty to live. There should be consequences, and they should be severe.
This can be applied to many things. Do not concentrate on the behavior, but on the consequences. Take this whole airport mess because of the "War on Terror." Why are we inconveniencing everyone? Frisking little old ladies? Come on! It is ridiculous. I would profile anyone with a link to a jihadist government or organization in the Middle East. The intelligence is there. Same with those who have links to hate groups here in America. Does not matter! Problem is we have become way too PC. We can't even look out for our own enemies anymore because we might offend somebody. Good grief! Muslim foreigners? Definitely. Muslim Americans? At least keep an eye on. KKK? Definitely. Tea Baggers? Yes. Tea Baggers or KKK that happen to be veterans? Definitely. Tea Baggers with psychological history? Definitely. This is very simple, and we can stop punishing everybody else for a few loose cannons. I also support the 2nd Amendment everywhere. Let people carry firearms, and there won't be anymore death tolls at college campuses, office complexes, or airports. But what do I know? |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
1. A sex act. 2. A phrase Fox News picked to promote a series of "Boston Tea Party" reenactment protests against the Obama administration on Tax Freedom Day, apparently unaware of the meaning of the phrase (see above.) Fox news watcher: are you going to the tea bagger party? Me: what are you, some kinda perv? |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
Thou shall not kill is a moral position.
|
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Very true sir. Just not sure where you are going with it. Can you add an explanation?
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Lets Debate Utilitarianism and Morality | tollcriticalthinker | Philosophy | 9 | 01-11-2010 02:40 AM |