This American Generation Is A Disgrace To Their Forefathers

[REIMktg]

I understand you're trying to point out the reasoning behind why the "government" has authority, but of course it's all complete bullshit and immoral. I've never consented to any of it, and simply having been born here is not consent.

As we should agree that is why I wrote it given the assumptions, in an effort to avoid the can of worms related to the second part of your statement.

Masses don't exist, just individuals. I consider myself rather responsible and I can be trusted to manage myself. If there are other individuals who are irresponsible, the consequences are theirs, not anyone else.

It is also prideful for so many to state how well they can take care of themselves and yet no one knows what tomorrow may bring. The road of life is not clear, you can hit an IED at no fault of your own that instantly takes away the facade of self reliance and security.

I should also add that the consequences of the irresponsible impacts the responsible. What happens if the irresponsible has no means to pay for the consequences of their actions? Society steps in, because they must.

Let's say I live in the US and assume I don't accept government for what it is. It is reasonable to say that government then does not have authority over my body?

Another argument that I have been avoiding because I am trying to stay out of STS in general and it is a part of the whole Anarchy debate that I do not want to be in until I had the time to read more and formulate appropriate rebuttals based on the underlying components of the argument.

My quick answer is that it is reasonable to say that with or without consent you do take in some ways from the Govt and therefore are subject to its rule of law. Should enough citizens take action to change those laws, they can. I have pointed out the process in CA at least, repeatedly, yet no one that I know of here cares to take action. The Drug laws are federal, I understand, but those too can be changed over time. everyone would rather scrap the system than fix it - good luck with that.

 

[scottspfd82]

Here is a thought exercise for those of you who would like marijuana to be legalized:

Would you also advocate legalizing drinking and driving?*


* this question assumes the current environment in which roads are essentially owned by the state.

Yes.

But I'm certain I'd be in the minority on that one. Could be an interesting topic for its own thread.

 

[eVandals]

Is Obama still President?

Fuck! back to sleep then.................

A wild popeye appears

 

[hehejo]

My quick answer is that it is reasonable to say that with or without consent you do take in some ways from the Govt and therefore are subject to its rule of law. Should enough citizens take action to change those laws, they can. I have pointed out the process in CA at least, repeatedly, yet no one that I know of here cares to take action. The Drug laws are federal, I understand, but those too can be changed over time. everyone would rather scrap the system than fix it - good luck with that.

But how do we decide where we draw the line?

Is a one world democracy that makes the rules for everyone be the right thing?
Or a whole country?
Or a whole state?
A county?
A city?
A district?

Which one should have the ultimate authority?

For me the only reasonable conclusion is that it is the rightful property owner (with regards to the non aggression principle of course).

 

[REIMktg]

But how do we decide where we draw the line?

Is a one world democracy that makes the rules for everyone be the right thing?
Or a whole country?
Or a whole state?
A county?
A city?
A district?

Which one should have the ultimate authority?

For me the only reasonable conclusion is that it is the rightful property owner (with regards to the non aggression principle of course).

Though I cannot get into any time consuming discussions, as noted in other threads it, your ideal system relies on the evolution of Man's nature, not likely anytime soon. Changing the system currently in place is possible and can be completed within our lifetime.

 

[-joe-]

I've never really understood the logic in debating with Hellblazer. Are all the people in this thread hoping that one day he'll suddenly go "you know what, you're right" and become a registered Democrat?

 

[gerMAN]

This is it. No fucking way this guy is not trolling. Some days I'm REALLY close to being convinced that somewhere out there, there's a guy who's truly believes all this BS but today is not one of those days. Today is the day I'm 98% (because Poe's law and all..) sure this guy is a rather sophisticated troll who pushed it just a tad bit too far to stay believable.

 

[hellblazer]

trolling...

trolled by a hellblazer thread...

internet troll....

trolling...

this guy is a troll...

 

[Moxie]

tl;dr - What you put in your body has an impact on others in one way or another and given that in the US at least, the Govt is expected to pick up the tab for everything, the Govt then has authority over what you put into your body.

Is that you, Mayor Bloomberg?

You're ignoring an option that is less extreme than outright banning. That option is to place extra taxes on the "bad" products.

If you are really that concerned about making sure the government has enough money for health care and such, then taxing alcohol, cigarettes, soda, and ice cream is far more effective than banning those things.

banning alcohol = less taxes coming in, but also more taxes needed to fight a war on alcohol.

So if you believe in personal "freedom", bans don't make sense, but also if you believe the government needs to force people to help each other, it doesn't make sense either because bans give the government less resources to help with.

 

[Unarmed Gunman]

REI brings up a good point about where the govt is headed with their logic though. "We pay for your health care, we get to decide what you put in your body."

Don't be surprised when that becomes another tool to control the masses.

 

[hellblazer]

REI brings up a good point about where the govt is headed with their logic though. "We pay for your health care, we get to decide what you put in your body."

Don't be surprised when that becomes another tool to control the masses.

They're already making that argument. 5 minute mark. And this was before Obamacare was officially the law of the land.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kLkFiiOUX8]John Stossel - Fox Business: 'Food Police' 01-28-10 4 of 5 - YouTube[/ame]

 

[rm@tag]

You do realize it's merely namecalling, right? Simply packaged in a pseudo-elitist presentation?

Here, I'll help you out:



It's the same typical "hurr durr right winger" slurs, simply packaged in pseudo-intellectual wrapping.

But if you do a lot of drugs, it works on your damaged brain and you think it's brilliant(see:you).

Probably want to pick your dignity up off the floor, man. Nobody likes to see a sycophant.

Why do you obfuscate like that in every post? Answer my fucking questions.

Do you realize that almost every single post you've made in this thread is bullshit that's been "simply packaged in a psuedo-intellectual wrapping"? I disagree with you then applaud someone who calls you out on your bullshit and that makes me a sycophant? It's not name calling. You really are ignorant. Your arguments really are illogical, you truly seem incapable of participating in a discussion based on logic, your posts are seemingly delusional, and you do seem incapable of reason.

Delusion of Grandeur

 

[shindig]

Who smokes buds anymore? I just buy hash and have a dozen different strains to choose from at any of over 100 dispensaries here in Seattle....before the law passed.

also, hellrazer is the biggest troll (or homeschooled) on this site...crying for gov to protect him gtfo lol

Currently loving diesel hash on top of some atf or g-13 kief, every wednesday is half price hash wednesday at "The joint coop" in the u-district. Here's their menu https://mmjmenu.com/dispensaries/654