Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Anyone can believe anything they like.
However, they can't let those beliefs infringe on the rights of others.
Exactly. Which is why it's crucial we have a clear understanding of the nature of rights. The notion that anyone has a 'right' to force others to do business with them isn't coherent. No one has a 'right' to be treated equally by society at large. The right to free association is, on the other hand, an inalienable right that government is constitutionally bound to protect.
Courts have found that you have a right to free association as it relates to your personal relationships. However, they do not extend that right to businesses operating in the public domain
You may not like serving blacks.....but you cannot turn them away
Courts have found that you have a right to free association as it relates to your personal relationships. However, they do not extend that right to businesses operating in the public domain
You may not like serving blacks.....but you cannot turn them away
Courts have found that you have a right to free association as it relates to your personal relationships. However, they do not extend that right to businesses operating in the public domain
You may not like serving blacks.....but you cannot turn them away
Yes... I understand the law, and the courts decisions. I disagree with them. I'm happy to explain why. If you'd rather just fall back on 'my side one, get over it' - feel free.
No one has "independent" rights when in communal contact with others in public.
An individual cannot carry his right to shoot one into public, shoot someone, and say "that is my right".
Reason stares.
No one has "independent" rights when in communal contact with others in public.
An individual cannot carry his right to shoot one into public, shoot someone, and say "that is my right".
Reason stares.
But of course we're not talking about shooting someone - which is an obvious violation of their rights. We're talking about the freedom to choose who you associate with.
How can you be excited for a Rand presidency when he has as much experience as Obama had when he was elected? Simply because of his last name?
The earliest Rand could run is in 2016, when he would have more experience. Regardless, if experience is what you're going for, Obama has more experience as President than Romney does.
I disagree. Romney has economic experience that actually produces results.
Took me less than a week to realize intelligent conversation with señor Starkey is impossible.
Took me less than a week to realize intelligent conversation with señor Starkey is impossible.
Took me less than a week to realize intelligent conversation with señor Starkey is impossible.
That's not bad.
I actually don't think Starkey is stupid. But he's also not the 'moderate' he claims. Seems pretty radically authoritarian from what I've seen.
Took me less than a week to realize intelligent conversation with señor Starkey is impossible.
That's not bad.
I actually don't think Starkey is stupid. But he's also not the 'moderate' he claims. Seems pretty radically authoritarian from what I've seen.
Yeah seemed slow to me. He's very authoritarian, as if people have only the rights government grants them (as if liberty can come from goverenment lulz)
...The Fascist State organizes the nation, but leaves a sufficient margin of liberty to the individual; the latter is deprived of all useless and possibly harmful freedom, but retains what is essential; the deciding power in this question cannot be the individual, but the State alone....
Benito Mussolini
.
The deciding factor is the representative legislature of We the People assembled, not the war lords of the 'socieites of equals' who will oppress the people.
Libertarianism will oppress the people as surely as did the communists, whom you guys idolize for the power of the cadres.
Exactly. Which is why it's crucial we have a clear understanding of the nature of rights. The notion that anyone has a 'right' to force others to do business with them isn't coherent. No one has a 'right' to be treated equally by society at large. The right to free association is, on the other hand, an inalienable right that government is constitutionally bound to protect.
Courts have found that you have a right to free association as it relates to your personal relationships. However, they do not extend that right to businesses operating in the public domain
You may not like serving blacks.....but you cannot turn them away
And the federal government was CONSTITUTIONALLY (1787) authorized to dictate and discriminate against businesses when?
.
The deciding factor is the representative legislature of We the People assembled, not the war lords of the 'socieites of equals' who will oppress the people.
Libertarianism will oppress the people as surely as did the communists, whom you guys idolize for the power of the cadres.
Courts have found that you have a right to free association as it relates to your personal relationships. However, they do not extend that right to businesses operating in the public domain
You may not like serving blacks.....but you cannot turn them away
And the federal government was CONSTITUTIONALLY (1787) authorized to dictate and discriminate against businesses when?
.
The CONSTITUTION established a Judicial Branch to decide the scope and applicability of your CONSTITUTIONAL rights. Your rights are determined in a court of law, not on a political message board
And the federal government was CONSTITUTIONALLY (1787) authorized to dictate and discriminate against businesses when?
.
The CONSTITUTION established a Judicial Branch to decide the scope and applicability of your CONSTITUTIONAL rights. Your rights are determined in a court of law, not on a political message board
True, an Article III Judicial branch was established.
Unfortunately , the same was abolished circa 1935.
Now we merely have impostors collecting a steady check and enjoying their Federal Blue Cross/Blue Shield. We are on our own.
.
