Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 87

Thread: NYC officials duped into approving first gay marriage

  1. #41
    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
    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.
    Fraud would be a breach of contract and one of the purposes of a state is to help uphold contracts.

    This is why you're not a libertarian: how should the government react to the economic downturn?

    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.
    That's like saying that I should support people being enslaved instead of having everyone killed. Both are wrong, and I aspire for a higher, more principaled goal. So because I don't support the slavery I'm not a libertarian? Seems to be what you're going for.

    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.
    I'm not one for settling for something that isn't right.

    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

  2. #42
    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
    Fraud would be a breach of contract and one of the purposes of a state is to help uphold contracts.
    So you do agree that there is a rational limit to personal freedoms? That the freedom to defraud people is not a personal freedom that should be rationally allowed and that there is a purpose for government to step in and limit specific personal freedoms to maximize total freedoms?

    This is why you're not a libertarian: how should the government react to the economic downturn?
    Depends on the downturn and the specific causes and circumstances. You make a lot of absolutist statements without realizing the details that matter. The devil is in the details and you seem to be unaware that he exists. The world is not black and white. Not all events are identical. There is no such thing as one size fits all in philosophical discussions. But you do not seem to care.

    I'm not a libertarian because you don't want me to be.

    That's like saying that I should support people being enslaved instead of having everyone killed.
    Huh? Did you just make that up hoping it would make sense? You know, insane analogies that are taken to the absolute extreme serve relatively little good in rational discussion. Come back with a rational analogy that actually makes sense.

    Both are wrong, and I aspire for a higher, more principaled goal. So because I don't support the slavery I'm not a libertarian? Seems to be what you're going for.
    I can see you are at the bottom of your barrel. And you just admitted what I stated. If you cannot achieve the holy grail, accept Islam. If you cannot have the perfect outcome in terms of libertarianism high ideals, you have no problem accepting antithetical ideas to libertarianism. Thus the difference between you and I. I realize that the high and mighty is unlikely. That does not cause me to entirely abandon libertarianism as you do. I push for the most freedom maximizing option that is left on the table. You accept the antithetical stance to libertarianism. Is removing government from marriage the best outcome? Yes. It is likely? No. Does that mean we accept freedom minimizing outcomes because we can't get the Holy Grail? No. That is abandoning the ideology as you seem very intent upon doing.

    Is gay marriage ideal? No. Does it expand personal freedoms? Yes. Therefore, as a realistic libertarian, we should push for it as it expands personal freedoms. It makes no sense as a libertarian to push for something that curtails personal freedom, especially when the long term outcome does not expand personal freedom.

    I'm not one for settling for something that isn't right.
    But you are. You claim you follow libertarianism, but you accept antithetical ideas and laws.

    How can you call yourself a libertarian when you accept antithetical ideas to libertarianism because you can't get the high and mighty?

    If we cannot achieve full fledged democracy, we should install a dictator? What kind of thinking is that?

    That's like abandoning Christanity because you cannot imitate Christ absolutely. That's insane. The high and mighty are rarely achieved. That does not mean we throw the baby out with the bathwater.

    You call yourself a libertarian. But you have no problems abandoning it at the first sign of trouble.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  3. #43
    Professor
    CrusaderRabbit08's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    05-13-10 @ 02:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,022

    Re: NYC officials duped into approving first gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by The Mark View Post
    Perhaps obvious Child is a libertarian liberal?

    Is that possible?
    Left-wing libertarianism is just as feasible as right-wing libertarianism.

  4. #44
    Professor
    CrusaderRabbit08's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    05-13-10 @ 02:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,022

    Re: NYC officials duped into approving first gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    Earth.

    Unless you're homeless.

    Or, as George Carlin would say "Houseless" because home is really a state of mind.

    But 'home' in the abstract is what he meant, and I think you knew that. So, your clever little comeback wasn't so much clever as it was little.
    LOL ..very good

  5. #45
    Professor
    CrusaderRabbit08's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    05-13-10 @ 02:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,022

    Re: NYC officials duped into approving first gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Ideally from a libertarian view, government would get the hell out of marriage and I've gone on record at least five times calling for just that. Realistically, that ain't going to happen. So what's the next freedom maximizing option? Make gay marriage legal.
    I totally agree with you on that. Ideally, I want government completely out of marriage; but, marriage laws are so entrenched, they'll never be overturned. The only option for equity is to support gay marriage. To not do so, is to give tacit support to this form of governmental discrimination.

    Neither solution is libertarian; but given the realities, which of the two maximizes individual freedom (something very libertarian)?

  6. #46
    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 CrusaderRabbit08 View Post
    I totally agree with you on that. Ideally, I want government completely out of marriage; but, marriage laws are so entrenched, they'll never be overturned. The only option for equity is to support gay marriage. To not do so, is to give tacit support to this form of governmental discrimination.
    Indeed. I don't see how someone can call themselves a Libertarian and then accept freedom curtailing laws because they can't get the exact law they want. It's like a vegetarian who doesn't like any of the vegetarian items on the menu and thus decides to order a large steak. Say what? But that's what phattonez is indeed doing. Can't get government out of marriage? Well, then it's okay to deny gay marriage. Huh?

    Neither solution is libertarian; but given the realities, which of the two maximizes individual freedom (something very libertarian)?
    Which is the crux of realistic libertarianism. You accept the most libertarian option. Even if it is not the one you ideally want. Besides, if we actually got the most libertarian laws, we'd be in anarchy. Absolute libertarian laws are something only psychopaths would want. Freedom to do whatever one wanted. Killing, rape, fraud, all that stuff.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  7. #47
    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
    So you do agree that there is a rational limit to personal freedoms? That the freedom to defraud people is not a personal freedom that should be rationally allowed and that there is a purpose for government to step in and limit specific personal freedoms to maximize total freedoms?
    Freedom is the ability to do whatever we want as long as we do not infringe on the rights and freedoms of others. Anything beyond that is not freedom.

    Depends on the downturn and the specific causes and circumstances. You make a lot of absolutist statements without realizing the details that matter. The devil is in the details and you seem to be unaware that he exists. The world is not black and white. Not all events are identical. There is no such thing as one size fits all in philosophical discussions. But you do not seem to care.

    I'm not a libertarian because you don't want me to be.
    You're not a libertarian because you don't seem to like libertarian principals.

    Huh? Did you just make that up hoping it would make sense? You know, insane analogies that are taken to the absolute extreme serve relatively little good in rational discussion. Come back with a rational analogy that actually makes sense.
    Oh but it makes perfect sense. Slavery is better than everyone getting killed (how having gay marriage and regular marriage sponsored by the state is better than just having regular marriage sponsored by the state), but slavery is still not a good thing. I won't vote for freedom, and if I'm prompted to vote my support for everyone getting killed, I wouldn't vote for that either. However, I haven't been prompted with that. I'll vote down slavery when I get the chance, I'll vote down everyone getting killed when I get the chance. I'll only support getting the state out altogether.

    I can see you are at the bottom of your barrel. And you just admitted what I stated. If you cannot achieve the holy grail, accept Islam. If you cannot have the perfect outcome in terms of libertarianism high ideals, you have no problem accepting antithetical ideas to libertarianism. Thus the difference between you and I. I realize that the high and mighty is unlikely. That does not cause me to entirely abandon libertarianism as you do. I push for the most freedom maximizing option that is left on the table. You accept the antithetical stance to libertarianism. Is removing government from marriage the best outcome? Yes. It is likely? No. Does that mean we accept freedom minimizing outcomes because we can't get the Holy Grail? No. That is abandoning the ideology as you seem very intent upon doing.

    Is gay marriage ideal? No. Does it expand personal freedoms? Yes. Therefore, as a realistic libertarian, we should push for it as it expands personal freedoms. It makes no sense as a libertarian to push for something that curtails personal freedom, especially when the long term outcome does not expand personal freedom.
    You can't understand my position until you look at the analogy seriously.

    But you are. You claim you follow libertarianism, but you accept antithetical ideas and laws.

    How can you call yourself a libertarian when you accept antithetical ideas to libertarianism because you can't get the high and mighty?

    If we cannot achieve full fledged democracy, we should install a dictator? What kind of thinking is that?

    That's like abandoning Christanity because you cannot imitate Christ absolutely. That's insane. The high and mighty are rarely achieved. That does not mean we throw the baby out with the bathwater.

    You call yourself a libertarian. But you have no problems abandoning it at the first sign of trouble.
    I'm not abandoning it. The state should not have any say in marriage, so I'll always vote that way: always. Just because I vote against gay marriage does not mean I am against the right of association or free speech, it means that I'm against government involvement.

    Don't look at it like I'm voting against gay marriage, look at it like I'm voting against state involvement with marriage.

    Look at it this way. I don't think gay marriage is really marriage, but with freedom of association, it really doesn't matter. You can call yourself whatever you like and I can ignore that. It's no problem for anyone. However, the state offers me the chance to accept or reject it. I reject it on 2 principles: that it violates my freedom of association (I don't accept it) and that I don't feel that the state should intrude into our personal lives. In a free country, there would be a 3rd option: you do what you like. However, government has effectively killed that option, so I will vote to reject government involvement.

    You may ask what if it was reversed. I don't like drugs. So if I'm voting along personal views, I would want the state to support the war on drugs. However, it violates higher principles that I believe in. I believe that we are in control of our body and that the state should not intrude into our personal lives. So I will always vote against the war on drugs. Even though personal feelings would lead me to vote for it, higher principles push me to vote against it.

    Hopefully this makes it clearer for you.
    Last edited by phattonez; 06-18-09 at 01:29 PM.

    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

  8. #48
    cookies crumble
    ARealConservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    04-21-17 @ 09:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,518

    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.
    it's just a lean.

    I put down that I lean libertarian, but in truth, libertarianism is idiotic and unworkable. For instance, nobody wants 9 years old driving cars on the freeway. Fortunately, us statists put a stop to it so you can cover yourself in libertarian purity clothing and go around talking about what awful statists the rest of us are while remaining in a functional society.

  9. #49
    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 ARealConservative View Post
    I put down that I lean libertarian, but in truth, libertarianism is idiotic and unworkable. For instance, nobody wants 9 years old driving cars on the freeway. Fortunately, us statists put a stop to it so you can cover yourself in libertarian purity clothing and go around talking about what awful statists the rest of us are while remaining in a functional society.
    In calling yourself a libertarian, you don't seem to understand it. If private companies were in charge of the roads, you think that kids would be allowed to drive on them?

    The problem is that you're critiquing libertarianism from an interventionist framework. Of course it's going to look bad.

    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

  10. #50
    cookies crumble
    ARealConservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    04-21-17 @ 09:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,518

    Re: NYC officials duped into approving first gay marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    In calling yourself a libertarian, you don't seem to understand it. If private companies were in charge of the roads, you think that kids would be allowed to drive on them?

    The problem is that you're critiquing libertarianism from an interventionist framework. Of course it's going to look bad.
    I don't call myself a libertarian, I lean that way, but call myself a conservative.


    libertarianism is bad because just like Marxism, it ignores the human equation. For instance, when can a father start having sex with his daughter? 5? 9? 18? Never? A libertarian purist will come back with some lame ass stuff about when she can enter into contract - while ignoring that the monopoly of state power determines when a person is able to enter into contracts. oops - you just might be a statist afterall.

Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... 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
  •