Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 58 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Nobody Is 100% Libertarian (Read 7485 times)
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 5533
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #10 - Dec 10th, 2017 at 3:17pm
Print Post  
Sicklers Dink wrote on Dec 10th, 2017 at 3:11pm:
You're in for a big letdown is you think you're going to get a reasonable discussion with that one. The first time you make a point it can't handle you're going to get a fist full of it's pigshit slammed back in your face.

I'll address that post in detail, at leas the part that's worthy of notice.


Awwwww.  Did I huwt the widdle twolls feewings? 

Look man.  You're not that smart.  You don't have to be to beg for my approval.  Just stop trolling all the threads posting your crap everywhere trying to derail conversations and attempting to make people upset
  

Greg Gutfeld - I became a conservative by being around liberals and I became a libertarian by being around conservatives

Matt Stone - I hate conservatives, but I really f'ing hate liberals
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Sicklers Dink
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 10544
Location: British Columbia
Joined: May 8th, 2017
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #11 - Dec 10th, 2017 at 3:22pm
Print Post  
Thumper wrote on Dec 10th, 2017 at 3:06pm:
That is a very good point. And it could have both positive effects as well as negative.


I explained my reasoning behind my opinion for a reason. I assumed that you could come to the same conclusion I did even if you do not agree with it.


Don't make assumptions with that one.

Quote:
By what right do we authorize government to use the threat of violence against parents to force them to raise and educate a child that was birthed? The rationale I often see is that because they made the concious decision to conceive and birth the child then they are responsible for caring for, raising and educating him/her until adulthood. This is assuming they do not attempt to put it up for adoption or make use of safe haven. As I see the unborn as having the same rights as a birthed child I see it as no different than requiring a parent to care for or support their child.


You're not even able to start out honestly by realizing that abortions are most of the time not related to any conscious decision by parents. If indeed it even deals with 'parents'.

Quote:
But I don't often talk about abortion seeings as it is nothing more than a talking point. There is zero chance of these laws being changed until society manages go expand their morality.


Good point, but societies in other countries don't run from the responsibility. You aren't looking for solutions so you won't have much interest in facing the heat I'm throwing on you over that.

Quote:
Additionally. Since abortion is legal, and if we are going to say the unborn have no rights then to be in keeping with equal protection father's aught to have the right to a sort of financial abortion. If the mother is able to opt out of motherhood the father should be able to as well.


No responsible 'society' says the unborn have no rights. Some Americans do. You need to learn to accept that response because it's dogma responding to dogma. I think you might already understand a bit but it's shit that wold fly in the face of your politics so you have to hide it.

Quote:
Additionally. I don't exactly agree with most libertarians views on age of consent. From what I understand many agree that a teen should be able to make decisions about their sexual desires at sixteen years old and that the parents can not stop them from making those decisions. They can choose to have a baby, or to abort a baby in my state at sixteen. They can also consent to sex with a much older person at that age. Be it a sixteen year old girl and a 70 year old man, or whatever. Would you agree that a young man or young woman aught to be able to make those decisions at that age?


You need 70 libertarian parties so everybody can find some agreement. That's the only real issue being mentioned in that.

Quote:
My issue here is that even though the teen is legally allowed to make these decisions for themselves without even notifying their parents, the parents are still required to provide support for them. Even if that teen decides to move out the parents are required to provide financial support.


Libertarians run from a debate on the specifics of any controversial subject. That's covered now. Unless you had the balls to uncover it.

Quote:
I believe that if reproductive rights are gained by a teen at that age then if they choose to have a kid they need to be considered a legal adult as well.


You need to stand behind your offbeat ideas and all that they imply. Libertarians don't do that but I'll keep inviting!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Sicklers Dink
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 10544
Location: British Columbia
Joined: May 8th, 2017
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #12 - Dec 10th, 2017 at 3:28pm
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Dec 10th, 2017 at 3:17pm:
Awwwww.  Did I huwt the widdle twolls feewings? 

Look man.  You're not that smart.  You don't have to be to beg for my approval.  Just stop trolling all the threads posting your crap everywhere trying to derail conversations and attempting to make people upset


I detected some passion in your plea!

The other point worth making is that when you tell me how smart I'm not, you're telling me something entirely different.

Now I won't say that you're not smart, because that can be judged by your audience. I will say that posting troll pictures isn't helpful to you. But I 'will' ask you if you understand what I'm suggesting in the paragraph above. Do you? When you do then you will stop doing it!

a hint: If you start telling somebody else that they're not smart, you're going to score big because you would have made me jealous. And dog help me if you ever stopped posting troll pictures and challenged me with substance. I've got too much work here already!
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 5533
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #13 - Dec 10th, 2017 at 3:31pm
Print Post  
Sicklers Dink wrote on Dec 10th, 2017 at 3:28pm:
I detected some passion in your plea!

The other point worth making is that when you tell me how smart I'm not, you're telling me something entirely different.

Now I won't say that you're not smart, because that can be judged by your audience. I will say that posting troll pictures isn't helpful to you. But I 'will' ask you if you understand what I'm suggesting in the paragraph above. Do you? When you do then you will stop doing it!

a hint: If you start telling somebody else that they're not smart, you're going to score big because you would have made me jealous. And dog help me if you ever stopped posting troll pictures and challenged me with substance. I've got too much work here already!



  

Greg Gutfeld - I became a conservative by being around liberals and I became a libertarian by being around conservatives

Matt Stone - I hate conservatives, but I really f'ing hate liberals
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 6949
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #14 - Dec 10th, 2017 at 4:25pm
Print Post  
I am 100% libertarian but it's conditional.

If you want the right to have a dog, then I want the right to have any animal I can prove is equally or less dangerous.

If you want no taxes for you, then I want no taxes for me. I don't care what kind of convoluted tax scheme it is, if it ends up as no taxes for you, but still taxes for me, no dice.

If you want the private ability to prosecute a criminal, then I want the private ability to prosecute a criminal.

If you want to eliminate police and the government justice system so you can start a private court, then I want the right to start one myself. If this is going to degrade into more guildism, however this happens, then no dice. If you succeed and I fail for any reason other than direct consumer choice, then foul foul foul and I do not want this system.

I'm also 100% authoritarian and it's conditional.

If you want to ban me from having a noisy rooster, then I want to ban you from having a noisy dog.

If you want the police to protect you for free, then I want the police to protect me for free.

If you want no abortions because kicking someone out of your property and causing them to die is wrong, then I want you to be forced to provide food, water, and shelter to any bum who wanders into your property and will die if you kick him out.

...And so on and so forth.

I actually don't give a flying crap what policies there are as long as they apply to everyone equally and fairly.

I think some libertarian party policies (like open borders) are ruinous, but the same goes here. I don't care about ruin; I care about fairness. If you want the right to cross borders freely and engage in free trade without government restriction, then so do I!!!

Yes, this is all incredibly selfish. So is everyone else. If people could agree on equality it wouldn't matter how selfish anyone was. Sadly, no one wants equality or fairness. Everyone filthy monkey wants dominance.

Thumper wrote on Dec 10th, 2017 at 3:06pm:
The rationale I often see is that because they made the conscious decision to conceive and birth the child then they are responsible for caring for, raising and educating him/her until adulthood.


To be fair, you could say that same thing against the parents for having irresponsible sex. They made a conscious choice to do that. It makes a baby.
  

Making Sci-Fi great again since 2063.

Not taking Jeff seriously until he admits this is animal abuse (which he says should be illegal): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE-IT7_CaE4
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 31470
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #15 - Dec 10th, 2017 at 5:56pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Dec 10th, 2017 at 4:25pm:
I am 100% libertarian but it's conditional.

After all this time, and you still don't have a clue about the most basic elements?

The only condition on individual liberty is responsibility.

You can do what you want as long as you do no harm to others. If I think you have harmed me and you tell me you haven't, I might complain of a tort against me and let a jury decide. If you harm me, the law will hold you liable to make me whole. If what you did was criminal harm, they might put you in jail. All you have to do is govern yourself accordingly, try not to harm others. Go your own way. Peace.


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 5533
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #16 - Dec 10th, 2017 at 6:38pm
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Dec 10th, 2017 at 4:25pm:
I am 100% libertarian but it's conditional.

If you want the right to have a dog, then I want the right to have any animal I can prove is equally or less dangerous.

If you want no taxes for you, then I want no taxes for me. I don't care what kind of convoluted tax scheme it is, if it ends up as no taxes for you, but still taxes for me, no dice.

If you want the private ability to prosecute a criminal, then I want the private ability to prosecute a criminal.

If you want to eliminate police and the government justice system so you can start a private court, then I want the right to start one myself. If this is going to degrade into more guildism, however this happens, then no dice. If you succeed and I fail for any reason other than direct consumer choice, then foul foul foul and I do not want this system.

I'm also 100% authoritarian and it's conditional.

If you want to ban me from having a noisy rooster, then I want to ban you from having a noisy dog.

If you want the police to protect you for free, then I want the police to protect me for free.

If you want no abortions because kicking someone out of your property and causing them to die is wrong, then I want you to be forced to provide food, water, and shelter to any bum who wanders into your property and will die if you kick him out.

...And so on and so forth.

I actually don't give a flying crap what policies there are as long as they apply to everyone equally and fairly.

I think some libertarian party policies (like open borders) are ruinous, but the same goes here. I don't care about ruin; I care about fairness. If you want the right to cross borders freely and engage in free trade without government restriction, then so do I!!!

Yes, this is all incredibly selfish. So is everyone else. If people could agree on equality it wouldn't matter how selfish anyone was. Sadly, no one wants equality or fairness. Everyone filthy monkey wants dominance.


To be fair, you could say that same thing against the parents for having irresponsible sex. They made a conscious choice to do that. It makes a baby.


Another example of my theory that Monty Python has a skit covering everything that happens in life.  That makes as much sense as this:



  

Greg Gutfeld - I became a conservative by being around liberals and I became a libertarian by being around conservatives

Matt Stone - I hate conservatives, but I really f'ing hate liberals
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 6949
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #17 - Dec 10th, 2017 at 9:25pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Dec 10th, 2017 at 5:56pm:
After all this time, and you still don't have a clue about the most basic elements?

The only condition on individual liberty is responsibility.

You can do what you want as long as you do no harm to others. If I think you have harmed me and you tell me you haven't, I might complain of a tort against me and let a jury decide. If you harm me, the law will hold you liable to make me whole. If what you did was criminal harm, they might put you in jail. All you have to do is govern yourself accordingly, try not to harm others. Go your own way. Peace.


You completely failed to understand my post. I have no problem with anything you say as long as you apply it in a way that doesn't massively advantage you and hurt me.

You are not allowed to define harm others as risk others when it's me, and not when it's you.

You want a dog? FINE.

I should be allowed to have any animal I can prove is less or equally dangerous.

If you say I should not be allowed to have a male chicken because it's noisy, give up your damn constantly barking dog.

This is the problem with libertarians. You start out with plausible (but as it turns out, nebulous) things like don't harm others, and then if I want something noisy, it's harming you because it makes noise. It's lowering your property values, thus damaging your property. But if you want a damn constantly barking dog, then, "of course sound isn't aggression! Are you crazy?"

Make whatever damn rules you like as long as they don't change in the middle of the game.

kaz wrote on Dec 10th, 2017 at 6:38pm:
Another example of my theory that Monty Python has a skit covering everything that happens in life.  That makes as much sense as this:


You can call everything I say meaningless rubbish and I'll even agree with you, if you do it Britishly.

A thing done Britishly is a thing done properly, and thus inherently correct by its very nature.
  

Making Sci-Fi great again since 2063.

Not taking Jeff seriously until he admits this is animal abuse (which he says should be illegal): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WE-IT7_CaE4
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 31470
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #18 - Dec 11th, 2017 at 7:52am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Dec 10th, 2017 at 9:25pm:
You completely failed to understand my post.
You want a dog? FINE.

I should be allowed to have any animal I can prove is less or equally dangerous.

I understood you perfectly. It is you who fails to understand the idea of general liberty constrained by the common law of torts.

You can have anything you want and obtain without theft.

If, through your carelessness or negligence, someone feels they have been harmed by whatever you have, they can claim a common law tort and seek to have you make them whole from the damage you have caused, which might rise to the level of criminal harm.

It's a foundational theory of liberty; You are free, but responsible for what you do with that freedom.

The things you object to arise because implementing this theory by practical policies in any community results in compromises. Rational people in your community will make laws or ordinances that restrict your liberty. This can't be avoided. People understand that building an explosives factory in a residential neighborhood can have catastrophic bad effects, so they will restrict your freedom to build an explosives factory in a residential neighborhood rather than hold you responsible after somebody screws up and hundreds of homes are leveled by a huge explosion.

Same thing with your tiger. Rational people in your community won't be willing to wait until you screw up and your tiger gets loose and eats their children so they can sue you. They will restrict your liberty instead.

Good government protects liberty to the maximum practical extent possible, but it does not require that rational people can't act to prevent harm when the potential harm to the community looks imminent or catastrophic.

If you want to build an explosives factory in a residential neighborhood, you will have to find a completely anarchic neighborhood. If you want complete liberty, you must live isolated from everyone else.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 5533
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Reply #19 - Dec 11th, 2017 at 9:48am
Print Post  
The Opposition wrote on Dec 10th, 2017 at 9:25pm:
You completely failed to understand my post


That means he understood it perfectly.  Reading comprehension doesn't mean that you pull meaning out of gibberish
  

Greg Gutfeld - I became a conservative by being around liberals and I became a libertarian by being around conservatives

Matt Stone - I hate conservatives, but I really f'ing hate liberals
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 58
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Nobody Is 100% Libertarian
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy