Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Kill your television, it's watching you.
Imagine what it would be like to have to construct your sexual identity out of nothing.
- Thread starter bundee1
- Start date
bluntmassa1
Well-Known Member
Nah, I'm still rocking the old school projection screen.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
then there would not be zealots "on both sides" as you claim, al the zealots would come from your side of transphobia and homophobia.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Property rights come from gov't, which is why gov't can remove property rights just as easily. Just because you keep saying otherwise doesn't mean property rights are granted by gawd.
Kasuti
Well-Known Member
I don't think traditional conservatives are scared in any way whatsoever. I believe it comes down to traditional values clashing with liberal values with each side having a small number of extremist which seem to draw the most media attention.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
We agree that property rights are often offended by government, but property rights do not "come from"
government or at least not from a government based in involuntary capture.
Also, a property right can exist even if "gawd" doesn't exist.
That is evidenced by a persons physical being. A physical being, like a human, in order to be a physical being must exist somewhere. It is difficult for two humans to occupy the same space simultaneously, therefore it would seem that people have a right to exist somewhere.
Further, people in order to live must use natural resources for food, etc. or they will die. A person who occupies a given piece of land and mixes his labor with the natural resources has created a kind of "property" .
I think when people attempt to define a "right" in the context of it "coming from government", it would be more appropriate to call that a "privilege".
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
I disagree with your assumption that since 2 people cannot occupy the same space they have a 'Right' to space. Your assertion has more to do with physics than philosophy.
A person can alter a piece of 'Property' but that does not make it theirs. They can erect barriers to keep out other humans and/or animals yet it does not make it 'theirs'.
If you disagree then show me the property rights of people who lived thousands of years ago.
You cannot have rights to property without a society and a government. The rights you speak of come from human constructs, not from nature.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Yes, a person can alter a piece of property.
However, if that property is already occupied and / or belongs to another person, the mere alteration of another persons property does not make it belong to the person altering it.
A person has a kind of property right in themself. Would you agree that if there is an "owner" of a physical being, that it would be that same physical being? If you agree with that, then a persons existence is evidence of their property right in themselves.
Also, society and government can be two distinct and separate things, that can be proven when a society is made up of mostly peaceful individual people, but "ruled" by a system which arises from an involuntary (not peaceful) set of "rules". The terms would then be in opposition to one another.
Human beings, (who have a property right in themselves) predate the existence of government, therefore property rights could not have "come from government" solely.
Jimdamick
Well-Known Member
Who's the dildo? You? Just curious.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
When you are alive, I believe that you "own yourself" or that you should own yourself and that it is your "right" to own yourself, but not your right to own others.
If a person lives alone, not among others, (society) for the period they are alive, their body is their "property" , it still belongs to them when they are alone and when / if ever they interact with others .
When you die, if you're lucky, worms will eat you and create worm castings, then you will come back as a flower and other people will smoke you.
Jimdamick
Well-Known Member
I guess you are supposedly straight, right?. Imagine someone who knows at the age of 7 that something is different about the way he feels, and people don't like it, especially his proud heterosexual farther. I grew up next door to a gay child, that EVERYONE fucked with, starting at the the age of 6, because he liked dolls (before GI Joes), liked to make cookies, and pretended he was a girl. Can you imagine what that was like for a boy in 1965? He, because of the time he lived in, was ostracized his entire youth, and most of his adult life because he was gay. He died of AIDS, by the way in 1982 at the age of 33 , but the only thing he was confused about was why he was hated, especially by his farther.about being gay. The LGBT community are still confused about why they are still hated in the 21st century for not being "normal" (LMFAO) He always was wondering why he was hated for basically his entire life for being different. He was a nice guy, always, and did not deserve the shit that was given him his entire fucking life,by a lot of people, that sound exactly like you in a way, in the sense is they are confused about people that are gay. It is not a life choice, it is what that person is born to be.
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
I stopped reading here. You should learn basic writing techniques, so you will know not to open with BS and lose the interest of your target audience. Not that I have ever been interested in the screeds of an ancap.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Your inability to recognize the difference between a revocable privilege and a right has you swimming on the carpet, while I'm out back paddling in the pool. How do those rug burns feel?
abandonconflict
Well-Known Member
Property rights come from gov't. Lame ass analogies about carpets ad pools notwithstanding, this fact clearly causes you distress, since it demonstrates the inherent contradictions of "anarchocapitalism".
When your philosophy has an oxymoron for a name, it is a pretty good indication that you have cognitive dissonance.
Rawn Pawl lost, get over it.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Interesting story. I grew up in a time when many guys were extremely homophobic and it didn't sit well with me either.
People that leave others alone should be free to pursue who ever or what ever they are.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I'm curious if you believe in the concept of "intellectual property" .
Yes, Ron Paul lost. I got over that 8 years ago, and have favored Vermin Supreme since. Although, I still like that Ron Paul wants to end the foreign Empire. You were a storm trooper for the empire weren't you? Don't you still get paid stolen money for your role in invading other peoples lives?
I just wish Ron Paul would get a little more Lysander Spoonerish and question the Constitution as holding any kind of authority from the onset.
Jimdamick
Well-Known Member
If that is your opinion, I really, really, really hope have a gay child, you son of a bitch.
NLXSK1
Well-Known Member
I didnt post an opinon, I posted 2 questions.