Page 54 of 80 FirstFirst ... 444525354555664 ... LastLast
Results 531 to 540 of 800

Thread: Is the Republican Party in danger of dying out?

  1. #531
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Does your argument hinge the word unalienable as opposed to the word inalienable and do you ascribe a different meaning to one over the other? Or do you accept the undeniable historical evidence from jefferson himself that the two terms can be used interchangeably without changing the meaning?

    And so i understand this idea you have put forth that rights cannot be taken away - is it your contention that the right to keep and bear arms is one of those inalienable rights that cannot be taken away?
    ask your question of me in the constitution section of this forum.

  2. #532
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

    Quote Originally Posted by prometeus View Post
    So under Stalin, or Mao or IN the time of the Roman Empire there was anarchy?
    in those forms, those in power were secure.

    when no rights are secure....that is anarchy.

    there are only 5 forms

    monarchy/ dictatorship
    oligarchy
    democracy
    republic
    anarchy.

  3. #533
    Guru

    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    07-04-15 @ 04:17 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    3,032

    Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    That's right, and as a result of that, there is no way to objectively state that a person has a right or not. Without government, that would merely be an subjective exercise.
    I agree; with no govt, we just do whatever the hell we want. It's not a question of rights or no rights; it's just we do whatever we want. Nature doesn't give us any rights; there is no god to give us rights; we would just be out there living brutal and short lives.

    Without govt, do I have free speech? sure, I can say whatever I want. I can kill anyone I want. I can run around naked in front of other people. I can eat a baby. These aren't "rights". These are behaviors that aren't being regulated.

    There are no "natural rights".

  4. #534
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

    Quote Originally Posted by Born Free View Post
    Correct me if I'm wrong, government never granted you free speech, it does however protect your right to it.
    And my response to you is that, as far as I'm concerned there is no such thing as free speech. Therefore there is no right to protect, as far as I'm concerned. You may not agree, but that's your opinion and is a subjective value judgement. What we can do agree to abide by the laws of a government that says there is such a thing. That's about it.

  5. #535
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: The Reason Democrats Are Backing Gay Rights and Marijuana Legalization

    Quote Originally Posted by paddymcdougall View Post
    I agree; with no govt, we just do whatever the hell we want. It's not a question of rights or no rights; it's just we do whatever we want. Nature doesn't give us any rights; there is no god to give us rights; we would just be out there living brutal and short lives.

    Without govt, do I have free speech? sure, I can say whatever I want. I can kill anyone I want. I can run around naked in front of other people. I can eat a baby. These aren't "rights". These are behaviors that aren't being regulated.

    There are no "natural rights".
    Well I believe in God so I can't truthfully say that I agree with everything that you have said. However I will agree that there is no such thing as natural rights, at least not as conceived by western philosophers.

  6. #536
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Is the Republican Party in danger of dying out?

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    Point #1 is pretty solid.

    Point #2 is from lala-land. It's the Democratic Party which is always pushing race-based policies, so how on Earth can opposition to race-based policies be indicative of racism?

    Point #3 is also pretty good, but if you look at the various factions in the American polity, the isolationists are found in the Republican Party. It's the Democrats who are the most eager to engage in the internationalist view, to project power, to use American might for society-building experiments, to grant foreign aid, etc. I'm not saying that this doesn't go on in the Republican Party, I'm agreeing that it should be curtailed because simply pointing to the Democrats and excusing Republican behavior by saying "They do it too" is feeble.
    Well with regards to 2, I would suggest you look no further than the infamous "Southern Strategy."

    Southern strategy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    In American politics, the Southern strategy refers to a Republican Party strategy of gaining political support for certain candidates in the Southern United States by appealing to racism against African Americans.
    With regards to 3, yeah I agree that Democrats do it. They have their flimsy right to protect, or whatever it's called. But I'm not so sure they are more eager to project US power than Republicans. While there are some Republicans who are not like that, it appears to me that most of them act as if they have never seen a war they don't want to engage in. But that's just my perception of it. I can't provide objective evidence that they are more eager than Democrats in that regard. At least not off the bat.
    Last edited by MildSteel; 03-11-14 at 10:38 PM.

  7. #537
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 02:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: Is the Republican Party in danger of dying out?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    Well with regards to 2, I would suggest you look no further than the infamous "Southern Strategy."
    I'm not seeing your point. Explain it to me. What does the Southern Strategy from 50 years ago have to do with your claim that the Republican Party of 2014 is appealing to racist whites. What precisely are the Republicans of 2014 doing to appeal to racist whites in 2014?

  8. #538
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Is the Republican Party in danger of dying out?

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    I'm not seeing your point. Explain it to me. What does the Southern Strategy from 50 years ago have to do with your claim that the Republican Party of 2014 is appealing to racist whites. What precisely are the Republicans of 2014 doing to appeal to racist whites in 2014?
    Ok fair enough. Let's look at that. I can't really talk so much about 2014, because I haven't been paying very close attention to what Republicans have been saying. But I can give a fairly recent example of the type of thing I'm talking about. I was listening to Rush Limbaugh on the radio, back during the 2008 presidential campaign. I heard him specifically refer to Barack Obama as a "Chicago thug." I'm not exaggerating. That's exactly the words he used. Now Rush is probably not that bad of a guy. But that was way out of line. Thug is a term that is used when referring to a particular type of black male. It's nothing but race baiting, plain and simple.

    That's the type of thing they need to stop doing.

  9. #539
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: Is the Republican Party in danger of dying out?

    Quote Originally Posted by MildSteel View Post
    Ok fair enough. Let's look at that. I can't really talk so much about 2014, because I haven't been paying very close attention to what Republicans have been saying. But I can give a fairly recent example of the type of thing I'm talking about. I was listening to Rush Limbaugh on the radio, back during the 2008 presidential campaign. I heard him specifically refer to Barack Obama as a "Chicago thug." I'm not exaggerating. That's exactly the words he used. Now Rush is probably not that bad of a guy. But that was way out of line. Thug is a term that is used when referring to a particular type of black male. It's nothing but race baiting, plain and simple.

    That's the type of thing they need to stop doing.
    then why do the Chinese always call crooks...."thugs"

  10. #540
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Last Seen
    08-18-15 @ 09:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,974

    Re: Is the Republican Party in danger of dying out?

    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    then why do the Chinese always call crooks...."thugs"
    You are a smart guy and I respect your intelligence. But I fail to understand why you are trying to provide cover for such outrageous behavior. It is simply unacceptable.

    But just in case you don't understand what I'm saying, here's a reference for you:

    Caldwell: Is "thug" the new word of choice for bigots? - The Denver Post

    Caldwell: Is "thug" the new word of choice for bigots?

    When Seattle Seahawks cornerback Richard Sherman last week said he didn't appreciate being called a "thug" — calling it the equivalent of the N-word — he opened yet another national dialogue on race.

    Is the word "thug" a synonym for that ugly racial label? Can it be? And in what context?

    The short answer is: You bet. The longer answer has everything to do with the situation and who's doing the talking.

    "Some words can be used as a stand-in or a proxy for the N-word, and 'thug' is one of them," Keith Mayes, a University of Minnesota professor of African-American studies told me.

    A "thug" is often a young, black, poor, inner-city male and the label comes with at least a whiff of criminality, Mayes said.
    The point is this, Republicans need to stop race baiting in this way, that's if they want to make their party more attractive.

Page 54 of 80 FirstFirst ... 444525354555664 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •