ExRx.net

Exercise Prescription on the Net
It is currently Tue Jul 29, 2014 1:41 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 165 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 11  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 12:11 pm 
Offline
Associate Member
Associate Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 4:52 am
Posts: 551
Location: Antwerp, Belgium
TimD wrote:
Just curious Wouter, what exactly did they tell/teach you what started the civil war? I'm just curious, because even today, here in the US, even the local school kids will tell you it was "the war to free the slaves", but in actuality, it was much more complicated than that, and the slavery issue was more of an offspring of the conflict than a cause of it.
Tim


I think I learned about the Independence War and not about the Civil War, don't really know anymore. I got to dig out my history books from a few years ago.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 1:13 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am
Posts: 3983
frogbyte wrote:
A regional us vs them mentality certainly would have a role. But, growing up when I saw the Confederate Flag I thought of states rights and individual liberty. But it's hard to make the states rights claim when you read the actual Confederate Constitution. It -requires- slavery in all states, taking away the individual states' right to decide that issue.

As for Paul - if you want to say he's not libertarian because of abortion, ok. But keep in mind that by saying it's just a religious issue about a lump of cells, you're prejudging the outcome. Obviously if you consider the unborn fetus to be just a "lump of cells" without rights, then it changes everything. You can say any life form is just a "lump of cells" and rationalize away its rights. But, if you consider the unborn to have some individual rights, then the libertarian thing to do is protect his/her liberties.


Yes, I was indeed doing that, intentionally and as hyperbolic as I could. It was kind of a tit for tat thing to show you how ridiculous you are being. You recognized what I was doing, but don't seem to understand you were doing the same. That's the problem.

What you do is equate everything from conception onwards with a third trimester fetus. However when it is an embryo or a zygote, it is not even a fetus by definition. The things that develop enough to make this fetus a person do not happen until around the start of the third trimester.

Most third trimester abortions are done for medical reasons and in those cases the woman WANTED the baby. It was NOT her choice, both her and the baby would die if she continued.

Your side of course likes to pretend that the very rare elective third trimester abortion is the norm. It most certainly is not.

I actually think elective third trimester abortions are wrong, but I don't think criminalizing them is the answer. I think women need easy access to abortion rather than the roadblocks that some like to put in their way. That way they can do it BEFORE that.

Another misrepresentation of pro-choice is that it's all about "Yeah lets go kill some babies! Woo-hoo!". It is not like that at all. Nobody likes abortion, not even pro-choice. We all want to reduce elective abortions to as close to 0 as possible. We just have different methods.

Your side would like to criminalize and there is also a big overlap with people who make the problem worse through abstinence only education and keeping kids ignorant and unprepared.

Where as on my side of it we want to do the same thing, but through education. This include comprehensive sex education, so kids are informed and prepared for whenever the time comes. We also support emergency contraception to keep the zygote from implanting in case the couple was not prepared.

I don't know if you are going to understand any of that, and/or WANT to understand it. But there it is, the truth about it without any of the hyperbolic propaganda. Notice the conspicuous absence of Nazi comparisons? None of that "pro-abortion" and "anti-choice" nonsensical strawman-based name calling. Come to think of it their given names are actually gross misrepresentations of the issue too. They should really be called pro-criminalization and anti-criminalization.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 1:15 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am
Posts: 3983
As far as the civil war goes...... Yes, I do know that later it was turned into a states right symbol and it was all about rebellion and standing up for yourself.

However, that said, I agree with Hoosegow on this one.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 2:42 pm 
Offline
Advanced Member
Advanced Member

Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 3:46 pm
Posts: 1455
Most of your above comments are directed at a position other than mine, and there are more than just two sides to the issue.

As you may have forgotten, I previously mentioned that I agree with the principles of existing Supreme Court precedent that the rights of the unborn grow over time as the child itself grows. There are conflicting liberties at work, and neither party's rights are absolute throughout the pregnancy. Of course I continue to assert that die-hard libertarians can disagree on the nuances at hand, without either side being more or less libertarian.

(I agree that generally anti-abortion-criminalization advocates are not pro-abortion, and your assessment of the rabid abortion-criminalization/anti-contraceptive groups is fair in as much as it describes that somewhat extreme and small position.)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 2:50 pm 
Offline
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 1:44 am
Posts: 1122
Would a hard core libertarian (who doesn't obsess on argueing and dreaming and read Ayn Rand...but tries to do things) have supported John Brown?


Last edited by ApolytonGP on Thu Jul 08, 2010 3:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 3:36 pm 
Offline
Advanced Member
Advanced Member

Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 3:46 pm
Posts: 1455
Are you incapable of mentioning libertarianism without associating it with masturbation?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 3:53 pm 
Offline
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 1:44 am
Posts: 1122
I cut it. I actually respect how grown up people are here, despite being huge. I have this tendancy to overuse aggressive phrasing on the net for effect and laughs. It's actually gotten a lot better than when I drank.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 5:15 pm 
Offline
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 5:44 pm
Posts: 6391
Location: Halifax, NS
Don't drink and post.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 5:32 pm 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 11:21 pm
Posts: 923
Location: Ohio, USA
stuward wrote:
Don't drink and post.


That just makes me want to drink and post. Cause I'm a rebel.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jul 08, 2010 5:38 pm 
Offline
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 1:44 am
Posts: 1122
I used to drunkpost a lot. but i stopped drinking a year ago.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 5:58 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am
Posts: 3983
frogbyte wrote:
Most of your above comments are directed at a position other than mine, and there are more than just two sides to the issue.

As you may have forgotten, I previously mentioned that I agree with the principles of existing Supreme Court precedent that the rights of the unborn grow over time as the child itself grows. There are conflicting liberties at work, and neither party's rights are absolute throughout the pregnancy. Of course I continue to assert that die-hard libertarians can disagree on the nuances at hand, without either side being more or less libertarian.

(I agree that generally anti-abortion-criminalization advocates are not pro-abortion, and your assessment of the rabid abortion-criminalization/anti-contraceptive groups is fair in as much as it describes that somewhat extreme and small position.)


If you mean disagreeing about whether it is right or wrong, than yes, that has nothing to do with it. However being for or against criminalization of a major issue like someones bodily autonomy, has a lot to do with whether someone fits the definition of libertarian or not.

Then there is also what people usually mean when they use the word. Usually they mean someone who agrees with the Libertarian party platform, which is a very narrow definition. One that even excludes me as I am left wing rather than right wing.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:05 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am
Posts: 3983
ApolytonGP wrote:
Would a hard core libertarian (who doesn't obsess on argueing and dreaming and read Ayn Rand...but tries to do things) have supported John Brown?


Do you mean Harry Browne? I'm not sure what you're talking about here.

Ayn Rand is like dumbed-down Nietzsche.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 6:26 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
Senior Member

Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2005 6:40 am
Posts: 1991
Location: Texas
Ironman wrote:

Ayn Rand is like dumbed-down Nietzsche.


That may be one of the funniest things I've read and yet surprisingly accurate.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jul 09, 2010 8:34 pm 
Offline
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 1:44 am
Posts: 1122
Ironman wrote:
ApolytonGP wrote:
Would a hard core libertarian (who doesn't obsess on argueing and dreaming and read Ayn Rand...but tries to do things) have supported John Brown?


Do you mean Harry Browne? I'm not sure what you're talking about here.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Brown_(abolitionist)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jul 10, 2010 12:06 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am
Posts: 3983
hoosegow wrote:
Ironman wrote:

Ayn Rand is like dumbed-down Nietzsche.


That may be one of the funniest things I've read and yet surprisingly accurate.


I'm actually kind of surprised you've read any Nietzsche. I wouldn't have guessed you would be into such things.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 165 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 11  Next


All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group