• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you believe in personal freedom and responsibility?

Is it the proper role of government to pass laws to protect you from yourself?

  • Yes, if the government passed laws to protect me from myself, it then protects everyone else too.

    Votes: 4 6.7%

  • No, people are responsible for the consequences of their own actions.

    Votes: 43 71.7%

  • IDK/Other

    Votes: 13 21.7%
  • Total voters
    60
Federalist said:
For those who are following this thread, it is important to realize that when someone spouts crap about "balancing the needs of the individual against the needs of society", they are literally asking the impossible. It is impossible to EVER know what "society" wants. It is only possible to know what any particular individual wants. Thus, it is literally impossible to balance the wants of the individual against the wants of society.
Click to expand...

No . They are simply describing what we in this nation have been trying to do for two and a quarter centuries now.

YOur nonsense about what society wants and what the individual wants is the crap being spouted.
 
Cephus said:
That's really the question, it tends to be the libertarian crazies who act like the government is some alien entity imposed on them from above and not answerable to anyone, which is absurd. We, the people, voted them in. They are our responsibility and when they do things we don't like, it's our job to vote them out.
Click to expand...

thats not quite right, libertarians believe government is limited, because the federal government has 18 powers only.

we want the government to do secure the rights of the people, and leave them alone.

when someone violates the rights of another person, then it is time for government to act, until then its does the duties it has, and shuts up.
 
haymarket said:
No . They are simply describing what we in this nation have been trying to do for two and a quarter centuries now.

YOur nonsense about what society wants and what the individual wants is the crap being spouted.
Click to expand...

Then please tell me how you know what "society" wants. Do you hear the voice of "society" in your head? Has "society" written down what she wants on stone tablets?
 
ernst barkmann said:
thats not quite right, libertarians believe government is limited, because the federal government has 18 powers only.

we want the government to do secure the rights of the people, and leave them alone.

when someone violates the rights of another person, then it is time for government to act, until then its does the duties it has, and shuts up.
Click to expand...

You try to make it sound like anyone not a libertarian has some secret list of government powers outside of the Constitution. Which is nonsense.
 
Federalist said:
Then please tell me how you know what "society" wants.
Click to expand...

That is expressed through our duly elected peoples government in the form of law following the US Constitution.
 
haymarket said:
You try to make it sound like anyone not a libertarian has some secret list of government powers outside of the Constitution. Which is nonsense.
Click to expand...


no its just that people on the right wish to use the power of government for their goals, just as people on the left wish to use the same power for their goals....thru the power of FORCE.

this can be described, when i run into people who hate it when the government violates the constitution when the don't like it, and praise government for violating the constitution, when they support a specify government action.
 
haymarket said:
That is expressed through our duly elected peoples government in the form of law following the US Constitution.
Click to expand...

Those people who were elected are individuals. The people that elect them are individuals. Just plain old garden variety individuals like you and me. So when you say "what society wants" what you really mean is "what some particular individuals want."

That proves my point. You can ONLY ever know the wants and preferences of an individual. You cannot know what "society" wants.
 
haymarket said:
A part of this comes back to the eternal questions about the balance between the individual and society individuals in a society.
Click to expand...

So I went ahead and fixed that for you .
 
Federalist said:
Those people who were elected are individuals. The people that elect them are individuals. Just plain old garden variety individuals like you and me. So when you say "what society wants" what you really mean is "what some particular individuals want."

That proves my point. You can ONLY ever know the wants and preferences of an individual. You cannot know what "society" wants.
Click to expand...

So what? It is absurd to say that an individual person is not an individual person.

When an individual person is elected by the people to a legislative body, and they are empowered by the people and that body is empowered by the people with authority to act on behalf of the people as its legitimate government, they transcend and go beyond a mere individual. They together become the Congress or they together become the Legislature or they together become the Council. And that is not an individual entity. It is a group entity acting on behalf os society and is empowered by the people to do that.

YOu need to read Constitution again.

WE THE PEOPLE - not I as an individual..... its WE THE PEOPLE..... acting for the COMMON DEFENSE and the GENERAL WELFARE. Those are very communitarian concepts that are the opposite of individualism. And its right there in the Constitution of the USA.
 
Federalist said:
Those people who were elected are individuals. The people that elect them are individuals. Just plain old garden variety individuals like you and me. So when you say "what society wants" what you really mean is "what some particular individuals want."

That proves my point. You can ONLY ever know the wants and preferences of an individual. You cannot know what "society" wants.
Click to expand...

It can't be said that the many minds of society form a literal gestalt consciousness, but it is human nature to seek those who agree with our perceptions, desires, and goals and to draw solidary and conviction from the organizations that arise from such agreements; to the extent that people will alter or put aside dissenting opinions to sustain that solidarity.

There is not absolute concurrence on the subject of gay marriage among the right-wing, but whatever disagreement exists is not meaningful enough to create a serious crack in the political agency of the Republican Party. We at least know conservatives who are favorable toward marriage equality don't prefer it to the extent that it serves as a huge corrective influence on the platform of the Republican Party.
 
haymarket said:
So what? It is absurd to say that an individual person is not an individual person.

When an individual person is elected by the people to a legislative body, and they are empowered by the people and that body is empowered by the people with authority to act on behalf of the people as its legitimate government, they transcend and go beyond a mere individual. They together become the Congress or they together become the Legislature or they together become the Council. And that is not an individual entity. It is a group entity acting on behalf os society and is empowered by the people to do that.

YOu need to read Constitution again.

WE THE PEOPLE - not I as an individual..... its WE THE PEOPLE..... acting for the COMMON DEFENSE and the GENERAL WELFARE. Those are very communitarian concepts that are the opposite of individualism. And its right there in the Constitution of the USA.
Click to expand...

When you use the term "the people", you really mean "some subset of the people in society".

So once again, you are conflating what some particular individual want and prefer with what "society" wants and prefers.
 
Federalist said:
When you use the term "the people", you really mean "some subset of the people in society".

So once again, you are conflating what some particular individual want and prefer with what "society" wants and prefers.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you hope to prove through these observations, other than the concept of society is subject to certain limitations.
 
Federalist said:
When you use the term "the people", you really mean "some subset of the people in society".

So once again, you are conflating what some particular individual want and prefer with what "society" wants and prefers.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what that even means as it applies to the duly elected legitimate United States government representing the people.

You are repeating yourself over and over and making no sense.
 
Federalist said:
So I went ahead and fixed that for you .
Click to expand...

Nothing was broken to be fixed. What you did was like puncturing four car tires with a nine inch nail because one of them was flat and you thought they needed to match.
 
Morality Games said:
I'm not sure what you hope to prove through these observations, other than the concept of society is subject to certain limitations.
Click to expand...

My point is that those who wish to subordinate the individual to "society" really want to subordinate some individuals to other individuals.
 
haymarket said:
I have no idea what that even means as it applies to the duly elected legitimate United States government representing the people.

You are repeating yourself over and over and making no sense.
Click to expand...

I understand that it is essential for you to not understand. I trust others do, and that is all I require.
 
ernst barkmann said:
thats not quite right, libertarians believe government is limited, because the federal government has 18 powers only.

we want the government to do secure the rights of the people, and leave them alone.

when someone violates the rights of another person, then it is time for government to act, until then its does the duties it has, and shuts up.
Click to expand...

It has whatever the people decide that it has because the people are the ones who created the government in the first place. The problem with libertarians is that they assert that they're right and everyone else is wrong, yet they lack any significant political power to actually enact any of the changes or vote for any of the positions that they advocate. So, when faced with almost complete unpopularity, libertarians will act like they're protecting the world from itself when, in reality, they're just another failed political philosophy.
 
haymarket said:
So what? It is absurd to say that an individual person is not an individual person.

When an individual person is elected by the people to a legislative body, and they are empowered by the people and that body is empowered by the people with authority to act on behalf of the people as its legitimate government, they transcend and go beyond a mere individual. They together become the Congress or they together become the Legislature or they together become the Council. And that is not an individual entity. It is a group entity acting on behalf os society and is empowered by the people to do that.

YOu need to read Constitution again.

WE THE PEOPLE - not I as an individual..... its WE THE PEOPLE..... acting for the COMMON DEFENSE and the GENERAL WELFARE. Those are very communitarian concepts that are the opposite of individualism. And its right there in the Constitution of the USA.
Click to expand...

sorry but your wrong.....i don't send people to congress to control/ or set society.

congress has no social duties in the life's of the people at all......all one has to do is look at article 1 section 8 of the constitution.

where in congress 18 powers do the federal government and the people intersect.......?..nowhere........only pirates, counterfeiters and traitors are government's ......only customers.

added to this this clause from the constitution: To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;

this says directly that congress has no legislative power outside of d.c. or unless the state gives them authority for needful buildings only.......they have no social duties for the people, and no legislative authority over anything the state does not agree to.
 
Last edited:
Cephus said:
It has whatever the people decide that it has because the people are the ones who created the government in the first place. The problem with libertarians is that they assert that they're right and everyone else is wrong, yet they lack any significant political power to actually enact any of the changes or vote for any of the positions that they advocate. So, when faced with almost complete unpopularity, libertarians will act like they're protecting the world from itself when, in reality, they're just another failed political philosophy.
Click to expand...

show me where congress has the authority to step outside its 18 powers?
 
Federalist said:
My point is that those who wish to subordinate the individual to "society" really want to subordinate some individuals to other individuals.
Click to expand...

What you are ignoring is the reality that the people in our elected government are acting as much more than mere individuals.

When an individual person is elected by the people to a legislative body, and they are empowered by the people and that body is empowered by the people with authority to act on behalf of the people as its legitimate government, they transcend and go beyond a mere individual. They together become the Congress or they together become the Legislature or they together become the Council. And that is not an individual entity. It is a group entity acting on behalf os society and is empowered by the people to do that.

YOu need to read Constitution again.

WE THE PEOPLE - not I as an individual..... its WE THE PEOPLE..... acting for the COMMON DEFENSE and the GENERAL WELFARE. Those are very communitarian concepts that are the opposite of individualism. And its right there in the Constitution of the USA.

Catherine Bowen wrote a book called MIRACLE AT PHILADELPHIA about the writing of the Constitution. You should read it. One of the miraculous things about our Constitution and our system of government is that it truly works a miracle in that it transcends normal individual people into much much more - the voice of the people and the people are just another word for society.

And that is the miracle of America. For 225 years we have been trying to balance the needs of society with the needs of the individual. Sometimes we get it right. Sometimes we don't. But in the end we are still the best from of government going on the planet.

And that makes me very proud to be an American.
 
ernst barkmann said:
sorry but your wrong.....i don't send people to congress to control/ or set society.

congress has no social duties in the life's of the people at all......all one has to do is look at article 1 section 8 of the constitution.

where in congress 18 powers do the federal government and the people intersect.......?..nowhere........only pirates, counterfeiters and traitors are government's ......only customers.

added to this this clause from the constitution: To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;

this says directly that congress has no legislative power outside of d.c. or unless the state gives them authority for needful buildings only.......they have no social duties for the people, and no legislative authority over anything the state does not agree to.
Click to expand...

Your rather "unique " interpretation bears no more resemblance to reality that does a thirty foot purple unicorn.
 
haymarket said:
Your rather "unique " interpretation bears no more resemblance to reality that does a thirty foot purple unicorn.
Click to expand...

there it is reality!

so instead of following the constitution, to want to follow what washingtion does based on reality, and not constititonal law.

i can see Madison getting your shoe in his rear as you kick him down the steps of congress while saying" get out of here with your stupid constitution"
 
haymarket said:
What you are ignoring is the reality that the people in our elected government are acting as much more than mere individuals.
Click to expand...

Perhaps. But they are all still individuals. And the people who voted for them are all still individuals.

None of these particular individuals are "society". They are merely a subset of the total set of individuals in society.

If you can tell me what "society" wants and prefers WITHOUT having those words come out of the mouth of some individual but from "society" itself, then perhaps I will be convinced that this "needs of society" stuff is not simply collectivist claptrap.
 
haymarket said:
When an individual person is elected by the people to a legislative body, and they are empowered by the people and that body is empowered by the people with authority to act on behalf of the people as its legitimate government, they transcend and go beyond a mere individual. They together become the Congress or they together become the Legislature or they together become the Council. And that is not an individual entity. It is a group entity acting on behalf os society and is empowered by the people to do that.
Click to expand...

You use the phrase "the people" a lot. You mean "some particular people", which obviously is NOT "every person".

When someone uses the term "the people", I know I am dealing with a collectivist, and an intellectually dishonest collectivist to boot.
 
Federalist said:
My point is that those who wish to subordinate the individual to "society" really want to subordinate some individuals to other individuals.
Click to expand...

To subordinate them to the broader association of individuals.

Society is nothing as inert-sounding as a "group of individuals." It is the ongoing relations and interactions of those individuals directed toward shared, mutually beneficial goals. Goals that people implicitly agree to work toward by belonging to society and and sharing in its benefits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom