Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 87

Thread: NYC officials duped into approving first gay marriage

  1. #31
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: NYC officials duped into approving first gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    Yes, you're a statist despite wanting government out of marriage. There is no way that you can call yourself a libertarian without cringing with all of the things that you've said on these boards.
    Such as....?

    Let's see your criteria for defining Libertarianism. You do realize that absolute libertarian ideas are quite nuts no? That maximizing everyone's freedom to the absolute results in essentially anarchy?

    Except I can't support that option and I will never vote my support for it. Marriage is between a man and a woman.
    And you call yourself a libertarian? Really?

    That's what's great about libertarianism. The state is out of it and you can call yourselves whatever you want. I don't mind that, but don't expect me to ever support it.
    Did you even read what I wrote? The preferable option is for the state out it and letting individuals and private entities sort it as they see fit. But as earlier stated, that is highly unlikely to happen.

    So what is the next more freedom maximizing stance? You seem to want the most freedom maximizing stance (but one that is unrealistic), but then immediately reject the next most freedom maximizing stance and accept the opposite.

    And you call yourself a libertarian? Really?

    I thought libertarians were for maximizing personal freedom. How can you not keep pushing for the most realistic maximizing personal freedom option if you call yourself a libertarian?

    But I've heard you on other issues and you seem to never choose the "freedom maximizing option."
    Well that depends on how you define that. After all, you have made is abundantly clear to me that evidence is defined as you see it rather than on some independent method.

    Furthermore, I tend to look down the street, several years ahead in fact. If an action that will cause personal freedom to be severely curtailed is the cause of an act right now that increases freedom slightly, it makes little sense for me to support that short term act when the long term impact upon personal freedom is detrimental and highly outweighs the gains now. Paying a little more taxes now to reduce the debt is freedom reducing. Paying 50% of your income purely to pay off bankruptcy the country enters from failure to deal with the debt now is exponentially more freedom reducing than the short term option.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  2. #32
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:45 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    20,072

    Re: NYC officials duped into approving first gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Such as....?

    Let's see your criteria for defining Libertarianism. You do realize that absolute libertarian ideas are quite nuts no? That maximizing everyone's freedom to the absolute results in essentially anarchy?
    Do you not support spending during a recession and great government regulation?

    And you call yourself a libertarian? Really?

    Did you even read what I wrote? The preferable option is for the state out it and letting individuals and private entities sort it as they see fit. But as earlier stated, that is highly unlikely to happen.

    So what is the next more freedom maximizing stance? You seem to want the most freedom maximizing stance (but one that is unrealistic), but then immediately reject the next most freedom maximizing stance and accept the opposite.

    And you call yourself a libertarian? Really?

    I thought libertarians were for maximizing personal freedom. How can you not keep pushing for the most realistic maximizing personal freedom option if you call yourself a libertarian?
    You don't seem to understand. I don't think that "gay marriage" is marriage. Those are my personal beliefs. That said, government should have no say and people should be able to call themselves whatever they want to call themselves. Don't expect me to not call it out though. They have as much of a right to call themselves married as I have a right to denounce it.

    Well that depends on how you define that. After all, you have made is abundantly clear to me that evidence is defined as you see it rather than on some independent method.

    Furthermore, I tend to look down the street, several years ahead in fact. If an action that will cause personal freedom to be severely curtailed is the cause of an act right now that increases freedom slightly, it makes little sense for me to support that short term act when the long term impact upon personal freedom is detrimental and highly outweighs the gains now. Paying a little more taxes now to reduce the debt is freedom reducing. Paying 50% of your income purely to pay off bankruptcy the country enters from failure to deal with the debt now is exponentially more freedom reducing than the short term option.
    Was there a typo there? I think a message was lost because I can't get what you were trying to say.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "True law is right reason in agreement with nature . . . Whoever is disobedient is fleeing from himself and denying his human nature [and] will suffer the worst penalties . . ." - Cicero

  3. #33
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: NYC officials duped into approving first gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    Do you not support spending during a recession and great government regulation?
    Depends on the spending and the regulation. Great refers to what? Size? Depth? The number of pages it's printed on? I don't support debt spending. As earlier stated in a previous thread, a good government would build up surpluses specifically designed for it therefore eliminating the need for debt and thus reduce the taxpayers' risk to having to pay it off. Some regulation is absolutely necessary for freedom to exist. I believe in freedom to make informed decisions. We need regulation to ensure that information being disclosed is accurate and not fraudulent. The stock market wouldn't exist without disclosure regulation. A free market requires a regulatory framework to ensure that the market does not turn into a monopoly. That's the anti-thesis of personal freedom. Being anti-regulation as an absolute results in less personal freedoms. Unless you think that freedom to defraud people should be legal.

    You don't seem to understand. I don't think that "gay marriage" is marriage. Those are my personal beliefs.
    So you do not care that they infringed upon other's freedom? Especially when you have absolutely nothing other than emotional pleas? Seem very anti-libertarian.

    That said, government should have no say and people should be able to call themselves whatever they want to call themselves. Don't expect me to not call it out though. They have as much of a right to call themselves married as I have a right to denounce it.
    You don't seem to understand. A libertarian is for maximizing person freedom. You want the most maximizing freedom option, but then you just rejected the next most personal freedom maximizing option on the basis of your emotional beliefs. If anything, you are not a libertarian because you are willing to have your personal emotional beliefs supersede your belief in maximizing personal freedom. Do I like gay marriage? Not especially. I realize its consequences on our tax revenue and I think two guys kissing is gross. But does that stop me from pushing the next best freedom maximizing option? No. Just because you can't get the MOST freedom maximizing option does not mean you just stop and accept a freedom minimizing option. A libertarian will seek out the most libertarian option that is realistically possible. You don't seem to think this is important, thus I question your libertarianism.

    Was there a typo there? I think a message was lost because I can't get what you were trying to say.
    Point is, you appear to think I'm not a libertarian because I don't support the freedom maximizing option. I'm saying you are wrong because your perspective isn't the same as mine. Just because I do not support short term freedom gains does not mean I don't support maximum freedom gains.

    The difference between us is that you don't seem to support realistic libertarian goals. Only the lofty, in principle ones.
    Last edited by obvious Child; 06-15-09 at 06:45 PM.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  4. #34
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,720

    Re: NYC officials duped into approving first gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    But there is nothing forcing people to change those labels. If I completely call out someone and show that they're not a part of that position, then they still can leave that label. The debate wouldn't accomplish anything if that person will still keep that same label.
    I see where you are coming from, but under the rules, people can say they are whatever they want to say they are. What makes it more complicated is that the Liberal v. Conservative cubby hole does not exist for a lot of people. For instance, my wife is a Liberal, but wants the border with Mexico sealed, which is a staunchly Conservative position. The Liberal v. Conservative v. Libertarian paradigm may exist from issue to issue, but you will find a lot of people whose views conform to different ideologies, depending on the issue being discussed. That is why some will digress, on some issues, from what they have labeled themselves as. In any particular political leaning, there is no "one size fits all".
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  5. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: NYC officials duped into approving first gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    And it looks like New York has performed other gay marriages without knowing it.



    But what are government officials going to do? Demand to look up the bride's wedding dress each time they grant a marriage license? I would say that would be going too far, as a person's privates are his or her own damn business.

    You know, the question and answer I just posed makes makes a case for marriage too - None of the Government's damn business. As for myself, I don't understand why some people are gay, but I am straight, so I will probably never understand. But I do wish the couple a long and happy life together. In the end, that is the whole point of marriage.

    Article is here.
    Well I just don't think pulling stupid stunts like this is going to help anyone.

  6. #36
    Slayer of the DP Newsbot
    danarhea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:27 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    39,720

    Re: NYC officials duped into approving first gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Well I just don't think pulling stupid stunts like this is going to help anyone.
    I disagree. It puts the issue right out there, front and center.
    The ghost of Jack Kevorkian for President's Physician: 2016

  7. #37
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: NYC officials duped into approving first gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by danarhea View Post
    I disagree. It puts the issue right out there, front and center.
    Yes but it also promotes the idea that the issue is being slid in under the radar. If you have to trick someone into doing something, it probably wasn't the right thing to do to start with.

  8. #38
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: NYC officials duped into approving first gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    Yes but it also promotes the idea that the issue is being slid in under the radar. If you have to trick someone into doing something, it probably wasn't the right thing to do to start with.
    No.
    If you have to trick someone into doing something, it probably wasn't what they thought was the right thing to do to start with.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

  9. #39
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    02-16-11 @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    36,915
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: NYC officials duped into approving first gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    No.
    If you have to trick someone into doing something, it probably wasn't what they thought was the right thing to do to start with.
    No, I meant exactly what I said.

  10. #40
    Sporadic insanity normal.


    The Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    19,736

    Re: NYC officials duped into approving first gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    No, I meant exactly what I said.
    Quite possibly. I was disagreeing with you.
    Education.

    Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller

Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... 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
  •