Ron Paul Wins All of Maines delegates to the RNC in Tampa Romney wins ZERO

[JimBowie1958]

Completely beside the point. The point was that those people do not have the right to take YOUR right to do so away. You might hurt those that are close to you by leaving them but that does not factor into taking your right away to do so.

Lol, Dude, *I* made the counter-point earlier in the thread, so please dont tell me what my point is, OK?

What I am trying to reign in some is this popular (among libertarians anyway) argument that no one else is affected if I destroy myself.

For most people this is simply not true. And yes, I think that the need to avoid this injury justifies people using the law or other means to save their loved ones.

If my child or wife were addicted to some shit, I would rent a cabin out somewhere, read up on the affects of the addiction and withdrawal, and take them, by force if necesary, out to that cabin and hold them there till they were free of the physical addiction. The mental and spiritual part is another thing altogether. Some people just want to die so bad they will choose self-destruction every time. But I would do this for that one chance before they are gone for ever.

If you dont get that then it seems you have never understood what love is.

No one is arguing whether or not you will affect someone else, like a loved one, from destructive behavior. We are referring to the rights guaranteed by the constitution. Affecting someone can be done without drugs. I could have a bad temper and affect my loved ones by yelling at them when over something that is not their fault.

So I ask again, who gets to decide what "harm" is? If it goes all the way to the LOLberal view, then we should probably set up some check points to test people's patience. We dont want them "harming" someone else after all.

That is the difference here. We are guaranteed the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We are not granted the right to be free from all of the obstacles, pitfalls and dangers that liberty presents.

If I break up with my girlfriend, I could cause her emotional harm. Should we get a law in place to make sure I am punished should this occur? There are a lot of ways people's behaviours can affect others. That does not mean that it has infringed on their constitutional rights.

I dont hink that the emotional pain of a breakup compares to the destruction of unrestrained drug addiction, whether it is alcohol or pot or heroin.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

So YOU want to decide what rights define under the constitution? Show me these things, and I expose you a central planner.

 

[The Rabbi]

The narco-libertarians are not conservatives. That much is clear. They have much more in common with liberals than you think.

I've said since the first day in this forum that I'm a liberal. Jillian isn't, she's a fucknut, a leftist moron.

For unilateral nuclear disarmament? Check

Wrong bucko, try again.



From where? Germany, England and all the unsavory places they kill our sons and daughters? Damn right I am.



Not that there's anything wrong with us imposing our agenda...



Oh bullshit, moron. 9/11 is the fault of the Muslim extremists. (Who give the other 1% of Muslims a bad name.)



Do I oppose YOU telling others what they can do in the bedroom? Damn right I do.

For legalized drug use? Check.

What others put in their mouth is none of your business, You're not their mommy.

And a host of others.

But I can appreciate you don't want to claim these nudniks either.

You and Jillian are two peas in a pod. A couple of authoritarian goons pushing government rule of every aspect of life.

At least you're not claiming to be a conservative anymore. That's one step on the road to self-discovery.

 

[SniperFire]

Did you guys see the North Carolina numbers?

RON PAUL IS ******* WINNING AGAIN!!!!

 

[SniperFire]

[
At least you're not claiming to be a conservative anymore. That's one step on the road to self-discovery.

We need to expose these closet Pelosians and chase them over to the Democrats to deal with.

 

[Bigfoot]

Did you guys see the North Carolina numbers?

RON PAUL IS ******* WINNING AGAIN!!!!

Yeah, Ron who? is knocking them dead at about 10%. I think he just likes being a candidate rather then thinking he could actually win an election.

 

[JimBowie1958]

So YOU want to decide what rights define under the constitution? Show me these things, and I expose you a central planner.

The Bill of Rights?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Did you guys see the North Carolina numbers?

RON PAUL IS ******* WINNING AGAIN!!!!

Why do you want to be such an ass?

No one is claiming Paul is going to win any primaries. No one can match the depth of Romney's Wall Street bankster slander funds.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I'm familiar. What does that have to do with putting defined personal restriction on liberty. In this instance; what someone is allowed to do with their own body?

 

[JimBowie1958]

I'm familiar. What does that have to do with putting defined personal restriction on liberty. In this instance; what someone is allowed to do with their own body?

You mean things like selling ones own organs, or suicide, or adultery, or pedophilia (if a child wants to have sex with an adult), or beastiality, or prostitution, or ....

Well, I think you should get the point by now.

Societies around the world have ALWAYS restricted private personal behavior that only affects consenting individuals.

It is part of something that we call civilization.

 

[GoneBezerk]

Dumbfuck.....Ronnie lost NC.

I thought y'all were stormin' back?

I'm familiar. What does that have to do with putting defined personal restriction on liberty. In this instance; what someone is allowed to do with their own body?

 

[SniperFire]

Did you guys see the North Carolina numbers?

RON PAUL IS ******* WINNING AGAIN!!!!

No one is claiming Paul is going to win any primaries.

There have been whole threads on how Paul is going to steal the nomination.

Where you been?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Did you guys see the North Carolina numbers?

RON PAUL IS ******* WINNING AGAIN!!!!

No one is claiming Paul is going to win any primaries.

There have been whole threads on how Paul is going to steal the nomination.

Where you been?

Lol, OK, now I get it; you have a language comprehension problem.

Let me help you: the phrase 'going to win any primaries' is not equivalent to 'going to steal the nomination'.

Those two phrases have TOTALLY different meanings, OK?

You're welcome.

 

[SniperFire]

No one is claiming Paul is going to win any primaries.

There have been whole threads on how Paul is going to steal the nomination.

Where you been?

Lol, OK, now I get it; you have a language comprehension problem.

Let me help you: the phrase 'going to win any primaries' is not equivalent to 'going to steal the nomination'.

Your failure is that you have not been in the loop on the joke.

My post was a play off of the very recent thread entitled 'Ron Paul is Winning!'

But I can see how you made your mistake, and I won't hold it against you.

 

[JimBowie1958]

There have been whole threads on how Paul is going to steal the nomination.

Where you been?

Lol, OK, now I get it; you have a language comprehension problem.

Let me help you: the phrase 'going to win any primaries' is not equivalent to 'going to steal the nomination'.

Your failure is that you have not been in the loop on the joke.

My post was a play off of the very recent thread entitled 'Ron Paul is Winning!'

But I can see how you made your mistake, and I won't hold it against you.

OK, yes, I did not get that post.

These thread fly by so fast. I check before I go to work and its on page 14. I get home and its on page 34 or something.

My apologies.

But seriously, this nomination is not over. Though I think it unlikely in the xtreme, it is very plausible that Paul could get his brokered convention. If he controls enough delgates, pledged to other candidates for the first round or not, he can have his people lift the requirement to vote for their designated candidate or have his people that supposedly represent Romney to simply abstain.

If Romney has to go past one round the whole thing busts wide open.

I would give up my third testicle to see it.

 

[SniperFire]

And it isn't like being an irreverent ass is beneath me or anything, Jim.

 

[LibertyForAll]

I'm familiar. What does that have to do with putting defined personal restriction on liberty. In this instance; what someone is allowed to do with their own body?

You mean things like selling ones own organs, or suicide, or adultery, or pedophilia (if a child wants to have sex with an adult), or beastiality, or prostitution, or ....

Well, I think you should get the point by now.

Societies around the world have ALWAYS restricted private personal behavior that only affects consenting individuals.

It is part of something that we call civilization.

If I want to sell a kidney or commit suicide what business is it of yours? Adultery is between me and my wife. Prostitution is not really your business either unless you are the prostitute or patron.

The bestiality and pedophilia arguments are just ridiculous. No one is suggesting that the law allow innocents be harmed regardless of whether they think they want to or not. There should be an established age of consent and if you violate that you should face the consequences. The key phrase to remember is "Consenting Adults".

 

[LibertyForAll]

And it isn't like being an irreverent ass is beneath me or anything, Jim.

No, it's not and you are quite good at it.

 

[LibertyForAll]

There have been whole threads on how Paul is going to steal the nomination.

Where you been?

Lol, OK, now I get it; you have a language comprehension problem.

Let me help you: the phrase 'going to win any primaries' is not equivalent to 'going to steal the nomination'.

Your failure is that you have not been in the loop on the joke.

My post was a play off of the very recent thread entitled 'Ron Paul is Winning!'

But I can see how you made your mistake, and I won't hold it against you.

And your failure was in not understanding the point of that thread which was that he has started a movement which will change the republican party. These beauty contests mean nothing by the way June is going to be huge for Ron Paul. In case you didn't know that is when a lot of state conventions will be held.

 

[The Rabbi]

I'm familiar. What does that have to do with putting defined personal restriction on liberty. In this instance; what someone is allowed to do with their own body?

Who says the state cannot do that?