Join the Anti-Party Movement! End the Bias!

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by AntiParty, Mar 29, 2014.

  1. Not2BSubjugated
    Offline

    Not2BSubjugated Callous Individualist

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2012
    Messages:
    1,886
    Thanks Received:
    307
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Location:
    In a mysanthropic malaise
    Ratings:
    +651
    So you're going to ignore everything that I said except for the fact that I'm a libertarian? Should I take that as your concession that you are, in fact, a partisan Democrat?

    Also, no, liberty isn't based on morals. Liberty is a word that describes the freedom to act according to one's own will and without the interference of anyone else's will. Liberty is man's natural state. In a vacuum free of any other people, a human being has liberty.

    That said, yes, all governments are based on morals. Our government, as is made crystal clear in the language of our founding documents, was based largely around the moral value of individual liberty, which is coincidentally the highest political-philosophical value for most libertarians. Each citizen being free to follow their -own- morals as opposed to someone else forcing them to conduct themselves in any particular way.

    The concession to morality therein is that the right to self-determination ends at the point at which one forces their will onto someone else. -Individual- rights. Live and let live.

    What you're talking about is a moral issue that doesn't involve one citizen using force against another. . . nowhere do our founding documents necessitate that a fetus is a human or a citizen. The fetus's status as a full-fledged human is purely a philosophical argument and nothing that necessarily affects any human being other than the mother. Therefore, I see no reason for government intervention for moral purposes as the immoral act can be said to be victimless. I don't agree with these particular definitions, but again I feel that this potentially enforces my moral will on people who aren't necessarily affecting anyone but themselves.

    Next up, "Government is always bad" is a hopelessly fuckin stupid simplification of libertarian philosophy. What that describes is the philosophy of an anarchist, which is not the same thing.

    A libertarian believes that government is a necessary evil to ensure that each individual's rights are protected from other individuals and groups who would force their will upon others.

    Also, this people run the government, put your trust in the people, the people will be the best America always. . . um. . . what!?

    I'm guessing this odd tangent is your way of doubling down on the same concept that drives your beliefs regarding the mainstream media? Popularity = correctness?

    What about when "the people" believed the Earth was flat? What about when "the people" believed man would never fly? What about when "the people" believed that "the people" of African decent weren't really "people"?

    Sorry, but the masses don't know shit and Fox News didn't tell me anything of the sort. History books did.

    Speaking of Fox News, how is it that you've come under the mistaken belief that libertarians take their queues from Fox News? John Stossel and Judge Napolitano are the only libertarians on that entire network. Stossel has a 1 hr spot weekly during some shit ratings window and Napolitano doesn't even have a show, just guest spots here and there.

    Most of Fox News tends to side with harder right republican types, particularly those in the "establishment", and most libertarians, myself included, consider most of Fox News to be republican party cheerleaders and not a balanced source of information. Fox pushed Romney, libertarians voted Paul. Fox pushes Christian social values and conservative social engineering, libertarians tend to value the government staying as far out of social issues as possible. You're seriously confusing several different factions when you make the implication that Fox News is a guiding influence on libertarian opinions.

    It's actually even more ironic because your entire schtick is that people should think for themselves in stead of following blindly behind a party platform. Libertarians are an example of exactly that, and yet you mistakenly paint them as the republican rank and file. Sorry, but that rank and file is pretty far from libertarian. That rank and file tends toward socially conservative statism and most libertarians, myself included, don't approve.

    Seriously, if you're going to go so far out of your way to bash libertarianism, figure out wtf you're bashing first. The only thing worse than being ignorant is being hostile and opinionated about it. You should've started your post off with, "We don't take kindly to your type around these here parts!"

    Edit: I keep mixing up queues and cues lately. I gotta lay off the weed.
     
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2014
  2. Uncensored2008
    Offline

    Uncensored2008 Libertarian Radical Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    65,422
    Thanks Received:
    8,417
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Ratings:
    +29,778
    Let me google that for you

    Leftism is the manifestation of abject stupidity.
     
  3. AntiParty
    Offline

    AntiParty Tea is the new Kool-Aid

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    Messages:
    4,054
    Thanks Received:
    361
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +779
    Again, your first sentence says it all and I don't have to read any further. You stated that you are a Libertarian, I didn't put those words into your mouth. I never stated I was a Democrat, you did. You seem to have some things you need to work out so go do that.

    I did breeze through and you are kind of a typical Libertarian. "Liberty over everything" is the Libertarian policy. "DON'T MAKE ME WEAR A SEAT BELT!" Car crashes, the FREEDOM Driver gets injured so bad he'll never be the same...who has the Liberty in this scenario....The driver or the family that have to modify their life around the person that refused to wear a seat belt. Who has more Liberty. The Insurance payers who's premiums went up because of this situation, or the FREEDOM Driver.

    I think all parties should have an extreme focus on Liberty. But when your only focus is Liberty, you start making bad judgements. I tend to use the "Risk vs. Necessity" process I invented when determining if something should be a Liberty (I know, you don't have to think about it, it's easy for you) Seat belt, how hard is it to put on, how much does it infringe that person's Liberty putting it on. And what is the possible outcome of not putting it on.

    It's nothing against you or Libertarians. I just know platforms and all platforms think the same for the most part. It's why I'm Anti-Party
     
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2014
  4. AntiParty
    Offline

    AntiParty Tea is the new Kool-Aid

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    Messages:
    4,054
    Thanks Received:
    361
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +779
    Yea, yea. I'm aware that the extreme Right thinks everyone that isn't EXTREME Right is Left. It's why you assume I'm Left just like the other guy. Even though there is a rather big hint in my name that I'm not..................

    But I have one question for you. If the debate was so easy for you, why did you finish with "You are stupid".

    I hear this over and over. If you had a debate then you would debate me. This notion Fox News sells that simply stating an insult makes you smarter than the other person is pretty Junior High. :D
     
  5. AntiParty
    Offline

    AntiParty Tea is the new Kool-Aid

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    Messages:
    4,054
    Thanks Received:
    361
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +779
    The standard for the Right has been for years now;

    If they don't conform to every thought process we have, they are LEFTISTS!

    But I'll challenge ANYONE topic to topic on why something is Left or Right or Me. It's EXTREMELY SIMPLE when it's ME. Because I just think for myself and don't let others think for me. That's true Liberty.

    And I'm not afraid to change. I've openly thanked lot's of people over the years for holding outstanding arguments that have helped me change into the person that I am. It's not easy to thank people who oppose you so why oppose people? Why are Leftists bad? Why are Rightists bad? You are all bias. Just think about the topic, what it means to you and decide for yourself as an individual. Politics is opinion based. If you solidify yourself with a party it means you are willing to let that party focus YOUR opinion. That's not Liberty. You are you. You decide for YOU.
     
  6. Uncensored2008
    Offline

    Uncensored2008 Libertarian Radical Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    65,422
    Thanks Received:
    8,417
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Ratings:
    +29,778
    What does that have to do with your mentally retarded claim that only those with money can obtain birth control?

    :cuckoo::cuckoo::cuckoo:
     
  7. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,017
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,226
    Because he has no facts, all he has are opinions, which proves he can never be wrong.
     
  8. Not2BSubjugated
    Offline

    Not2BSubjugated Callous Individualist

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2012
    Messages:
    1,886
    Thanks Received:
    307
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Location:
    In a mysanthropic malaise
    Ratings:
    +651
    So you fancy yourself an independent thinker. . .

    Yet when you argue with me, you don't actually respond to -ANYTHING- that I've said, you just spew common misconceptions about libertarians.

    Sorry, but anti-party or not, you're not a thinker, independent or otherwise. This is the worst kind of intellectual fear/laziness, and you're even more guilty of it than the partisan ideologues that you bash. Frankly, I can't even fathom how someone could be so interested in politics that they'd waste time arguing it on a message board, but not actually interested enough to research their opinions. For that matter, how can you want to argue but not want to be argued with? Sad, really.
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2014
  9. AntiParty
    Offline

    AntiParty Tea is the new Kool-Aid

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2014
    Messages:
    4,054
    Thanks Received:
    361
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +779
    If birth control free? No. So yes, birth control costs money. This is a pretty basic point you keep driving in but not understanding. (You do realize that "birth control" is the standard generalization of a pill or other medical device/system that prevents pregnancy correct?)

    Or perhaps you are one of those "abstinence is birth control" people who have no ability to realize hormones overwhelm humans and accidents happen...
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2014
  10. Not2BSubjugated
    Offline

    Not2BSubjugated Callous Individualist

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2012
    Messages:
    1,886
    Thanks Received:
    307
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Location:
    In a mysanthropic malaise
    Ratings:
    +651
    You're seriously arguing that the problem is that abortion is less cost prohibitive than, say, condoms or morning after pills?

    Please, find me those numbers :)

    I'm starting to wonder why I'm still bothering with you. For having -no- idea what you're talking about, you sure say a lot of stuff.

    Also, when did birth control become at -all- cost prohibitive? For several years, I could afford ramen diets and a corner in the living room of a 1 bedroom apartment where I could put my bed, which was 2 mattresses stacked on each other. Still managed to wrap my dick up in those days, and if I didn't have my parachute, I didn't jump.

    If you can't afford your own birth control, maybe you shouldn't fuck until you get ahold of some. Just a thought from someone for whom that philosophy seems to have paid off. Hormones or no, every individual is responsible for his or her own actions. I'm a victim to the human condition just like the rest of us and somehow I've been able to turn down sex when it was a bad idea, even during periods of my life where sex was pretty hard to come by. If you can't take similar responsibility for yourself, I have no interest in coming out of pocket to help you fix your mistakes.
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2014

Share This Page