It seems pretty obvious that the big three-- life, liberty, and property-- work for the unselfish. You can have all three without, as Jefferson said, picking my pocket or breaking my leg. Any "right" that requires taking someone else's life, liberty, or property is not a natural right.
The founding fathers did a job on you. There are no "inherent" or "natural" rights independent of any government. That's a bunch of philosophical rhetoric that they used to sell The Constitution. It looks great on paper but in the absence of government or society it's not even worth wiping your bum with it.
Duh.
In the real world, in the absence of government, I could walk up to you and smash you in the head with a rock killing you and then take everything you have without consequence. There's your "inherent" rights.
Sure, and as the great philosopher Wayne once said, "monkeys might fly out of my butt," with a small enough monkey and large enough rectum. Of course there will be some sort of consequence. And you could do so with a governed society and suffer no consequence. Your argument is like claiming there is no entropy in the universe because around you are several ordered objects.
It might help to have a righteous basis for the secession, instead of being able to keep human beings as property and oh, just for the heck of it, let's say we're asserting state's rights.
Progressive Anarchy? Possibly, but really everything I've seen so far regarding the Anonymous movement seems to indicate that they're the left's equivalent of the Tea Party.
The members of the various tea party groups are, on the whole, known. They also don't do anything illegal in the name of the group. Bizarro tea party, maybe.
Well, first you have to assume that McCain is conservative, then you have assume that Montana is a blue state, then you have ignore the fact that since Obama got a lot more votes than McCain, a mere 60% majority of the lowest-porn states having voted for him is just following the expected distribution. You sure shut me up!
I'm curious... is the free exercise of religion-- that means allowing people to communicate freely about religion in public, and to publicly display items related to their religious opinions-- socially conservative, or socially liberal?
To be honest, I never pay Norway much mind and just let them go about their business... except when some vainglorious Norwegian prick decides to pass judgement on a country he really knows little about.
Excuse me, do you actually have details on their current salaries and benefits? I have this quaint notion of not assuming that union workers are always under compensated (and mind you, I've chosen to never do business with Verizon again).
Face it, Jessica was nice but was otherwise a plain/vanilla polite older woman.
That's what she WANTED you to think. In reality, she was the most diabolical sociopath to ever live, able to murder dozens of people and not only pin the crime on others but usually get them to CONFESS to it! How else can you explain a writer "stumbling" into so many murders?
The question I raised was basically "Yep the technology works, but how are you going to change the mindset of people away from ME ME ME to US US US?".
Red herring. People who don't want to cede control of their homes to bureaucrats aren't selfish, they're wary of despots. It goes way beyond being annoyed that you had no clothes for work because Mr. Smith didn't let you run the dryer. It ends at having your oxygen machine cut off because Mr. Jones wanted to set his air conditioner to 68 degrees.
Slashdot Mirror
I wouldn't call it a Mecca while you're there, or your dead body might be sent back in two pieces.
It seems pretty obvious that the big three-- life, liberty, and property-- work for the unselfish. You can have all three without, as Jefferson said, picking my pocket or breaking my leg. Any "right" that requires taking someone else's life, liberty, or property is not a natural right.
Duh.
Sure, and as the great philosopher Wayne once said, "monkeys might fly out of my butt," with a small enough monkey and large enough rectum. Of course there will be some sort of consequence. And you could do so with a governed society and suffer no consequence. Your argument is like claiming there is no entropy in the universe because around you are several ordered objects.
It might help to have a righteous basis for the secession, instead of being able to keep human beings as property and oh, just for the heck of it, let's say we're asserting state's rights.
Then he would have to run really slowly while making a "CH ch ch ch ch ch" sound with his mouth.
You're losing your mind over Santorum? I rescind my reasoned reply to your trollish post, you stupid douche.
The members of the various tea party groups are, on the whole, known. They also don't do anything illegal in the name of the group. Bizarro tea party, maybe.
A Slashdot nudist colony... now THAT would be corrupt.
But Cyprus is a member, and that country has a Really Obvious Problem That is Also Turkey-Related.
Looks crappy, though, especially when it flowers.
Los Angeles is in California, not Texas. See, the topic up there? ^
Yes, because all American beer is the same, all French are cowards, and all Slashdotters live their mom's basement.
Can you explain how a local government requiring use of the public sewer is a Republican problem?
I'm sorry I ran out of mod points for you.
Well, first you have to assume that McCain is conservative, then you have assume that Montana is a blue state, then you have ignore the fact that since Obama got a lot more votes than McCain, a mere 60% majority of the lowest-porn states having voted for him is just following the expected distribution. You sure shut me up!
I commend you on your patience in dealing with an opponent who substitutes ad homs and straw men for rational arguments.
I'm curious... is the free exercise of religion-- that means allowing people to communicate freely about religion in public, and to publicly display items related to their religious opinions-- socially conservative, or socially liberal?
To be honest, I never pay Norway much mind and just let them go about their business... except when some vainglorious Norwegian prick decides to pass judgement on a country he really knows little about.
Excuse me, do you actually have details on their current salaries and benefits? I have this quaint notion of not assuming that union workers are always under compensated (and mind you, I've chosen to never do business with Verizon again).
I'm trying to figure out what sexual act "bail out" is supposed to be slang for.
Do you have any proof of this, or are you just throwing that out there and hoping it sticks? Not that it would mean anything anyway.
That's what she WANTED you to think. In reality, she was the most diabolical sociopath to ever live, able to murder dozens of people and not only pin the crime on others but usually get them to CONFESS to it! How else can you explain a writer "stumbling" into so many murders?
Red herring. People who don't want to cede control of their homes to bureaucrats aren't selfish, they're wary of despots. It goes way beyond being annoyed that you had no clothes for work because Mr. Smith didn't let you run the dryer. It ends at having your oxygen machine cut off because Mr. Jones wanted to set his air conditioner to 68 degrees.
I plan to solve the problem by using a portable gas generator to charge my Volt. Then I can be green AND keep a load off the grid!
Susie Secretary likes to set the thermostat to 60, then turn on the 1850W space heater under her desk and flip the breaker.