Ew that pic is fucking gross. Did you really need to post that shit? I’m against abortion too, but I don’t see why you people always want to put up these disgusting pictures about it.
[quote]csulli wrote:
Ew that pic is fucking gross. Did you really need to post that shit? I’m against abortion too, but I don’t see why you people always want to put up these disgusting pictures about it.[/quote]
The problem is the pro life camp fights the battle all wrong. I think we can all agree abortions are largely caused by unwanted pregnancies? How can we limit unwanted pregnancies? Increase use of contraception, teach better sex ed (not hope and a prayer bullshit like abstinence only), educate impoverished people, etc. A LOT of pro lifers are all high and mighty and against this type of stuff (people are only going to have sex to procreate and other fairy tales that they get). THIS is the type of stuff that could REALLY help the issue, instead they oppose all of this and go for the big enchilada Roe vs. Wade which probably won’t be changed in my lifetime.
I find abortion unmoral as well, but I also realize the difference between a winnable battle and a losing one and just how much work could be done by trying to limit the amount of unwanted pregnancies instead of doing stuff like threatening or actually shooting doctors who perform abortions.
Not to mention these pro life people are also usually some of the biggest to hell with education, to hell helping poor people, etc type of cats. I have a friend who calls them pro birth. They want every child to be born, but once they are here fuck em they are on their own to these people. I don’t think that’s very moral either, but perhaps a different debate.
[quote]florelius wrote:
Right: Libertarians. ( in favor of rule of law, democracy and human rights, but prefer that the state dont interfere with the market. They often oppose a safty ned provided by the government )
[/quote]
Lies.
We simpply do not want to be your bitch, thats all.
What about teaching sexual ethics (not just how to put a condom) ? What about actively discouraging the bullying of those who choose abstinence ?
What about outlawing at least late-term abortions ?
what about supporting conscience clause for doctors, pharmacists, hospitals, etc ?
What about a radical overhaul of adoption laws and systems ?
[quote]
I find abortion unmoral as well, but I also realize the difference between a winnable battle and a losing one [/quote]
Except that some people put morality above their own political interest.
As they should.
For them, it doesn’t matter if the battle is a losing one or not.
And if you don’t like losing battles, you should not try to change their minds.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]florelius wrote:
Right: Libertarians. ( in favor of rule of law, democracy and human rights, but prefer that the state dont interfere with the market. They often oppose a safty ned provided by the government )
[/quote]
Lies.
We simpply do not want to be your bitch, thats all. [/quote]
So you want the government/state to provide a safety net?
[quote]kamui wrote:
What about teaching sexual ethics (not just how to put a condom) ? What about actively discouraging the bullying of those who choose abstinence ?
What about outlawing at least late-term abortions ?
what about supporting conscience clause for doctors, pharmacists, hospitals, etc ?
What about a radical overhaul of adoption laws and systems ?
Sexual EDUCATION in my opinion would be talking about how abstinence is the only way to be sure while also damn sure making kids know that if you are going to have sex that doing it with contraceptives is MUCH better than without. Abstinence only education is a joke that is ineffective. It isn’t bullying, people were having premartial sex 10 years ago, 20 years ago, 30 years ago, etc. Acting as if scaring kids is going to keep them from having sex is lol bad.
Not against some of the other things you mentioned.
As for losing battles I know all about them (I am trying to argue with Zeb after all in another thread who would support the Republican party even if they said they wanted to murder all people named Smith in their next platform). I don’t think it makes my points any less true. People who are staunchly pro life imo are partially to blame for the amount of unwanted pregnancies as they also tend to be staunchly against the stuff that lessens them.
We don’t want you to have an abortion. “Ok I guess I better get birth control.” Wait we don’t want you to do that either! to me isn’t an effective way to get your first idea going.
[quote]florelius wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]florelius wrote:
Right: Libertarians. ( in favor of rule of law, democracy and human rights, but prefer that the state dont interfere with the market. They often oppose a safty ned provided by the government )
[/quote]
Lies.
We simpply do not want to be your bitch, thats all. [/quote]
So you want the government/state to provide a safety net?
[/quote]
No.
That would make me your bitch.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]florelius wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]florelius wrote:
Right: Libertarians. ( in favor of rule of law, democracy and human rights, but prefer that the state dont interfere with the market. They often oppose a safty ned provided by the government )
[/quote]
Lies.
We simpply do not want to be your bitch, thats all. [/quote]
So you want the government/state to provide a safety net?
[/quote]
No.
That would make me your bitch.
[/quote]
So how did I then lie about libertarians not wanting or opposing a safety net provided by the state?
You lied because they don’t care about “the rule of law, democracy and human rights”.
Obviously.
[quote]florelius wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]florelius wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]florelius wrote:
Right: Libertarians. ( in favor of rule of law, democracy and human rights, but prefer that the state dont interfere with the market. They often oppose a safty ned provided by the government )
[/quote]
Lies.
We simpply do not want to be your bitch, thats all. [/quote]
So you want the government/state to provide a safety net?
[/quote]
No.
That would make me your bitch.
[/quote]
So how did I then lie about libertarians not wanting or opposing a safety net provided by the state?
[/quote]
Because we dont care what specific yoke you intend to place on us.
[quote]kamui wrote:
You lied because they don’t care about “the rule of law, democracy and human rights”.
Obviously.[/quote]
Yes, no, debatable.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]kamui wrote:
You lied because they don’t care about “the rule of law, democracy and human rights”.
Obviously.[/quote]
Yes, no, debatable. [/quote]
Revelatory.
[quote]kamui wrote:
You lied because they don’t care about “the rule of law, democracy and human rights”.
Obviously.[/quote]
First LOL, second arent the rule of law, democracy( or representativ democracy with separations of the executive, legislativ and judicial powers if you want to nitpick ) and human rights originally core ideas of the classical liberalist tradition and further arent Right-wing libertarianism in short a resurection of classical liberalism? Or have I missunderstood our libertarian residents completly?
[quote]
arent Right-wing libertarianism in short a resurection of classical liberalism?[/quote]
Nope.
In the best case, it’s a pathological mutation of classical liberalism.
In the worst, it’s a purely technocratical ideology, inspired by cybernetics.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]florelius wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]florelius wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]florelius wrote:
Right: Libertarians. ( in favor of rule of law, democracy and human rights, but prefer that the state dont interfere with the market. They often oppose a safty ned provided by the government )
[/quote]
Lies.
We simpply do not want to be your bitch, thats all. [/quote]
So you want the government/state to provide a safety net?
[/quote]
No.
That would make me your bitch.
[/quote]
So how did I then lie about libertarians not wanting or opposing a safety net provided by the state?
[/quote]
Because we dont care what specific yoke you intend to place on us.
[/quote]
That thus not make me a lier though, but perhaps a bit anal in wanting to be able to categorize political ideas.
[quote]kamui wrote:
You have to explain this one if you have the time and desire.
( pretty please with sugar on top )
[quote]florelius wrote:
[quote]kamui wrote:
You have to explain this one if you have the time and desire.
( pretty please with sugar on top )
[/quote]
Well, it was partially a joke.
But in a nutshell :
libertarianism is neither a modern version of classical liberalism, nor a “radical” version of classical liberalism.
Actually, they have been a few classical liberals with anarchist or quasi-anarchist positions. Godwin in the United Kingdom, Bastiat in France for example.
But they weren’t “libertarians” as we know them today.
Libertarianism is based on another epistemology and another anthropology. Another definition of human science.
Its principles (methodological individualism, praxeology, catallaxy, etc) only allows “mechanism-based” explanations of social behavior.
It may refute the need for “social engineering”, but, in last analysis, they see society has an engine. Just an automotical auto-regulating one.
It would need a longer post, but right now, i need some sleep.
[quote]kamui wrote:
[quote]florelius wrote:
[quote]kamui wrote:
You have to explain this one if you have the time and desire.
( pretty please with sugar on top )
[/quote]
Well, it was partially a joke.
But in a nutshell :
libertarianism is neither a modern version of classical liberalism, nor a “radical” version of classical liberalism.
Actually, they have been a few classical liberals with anarchist or quasi-anarchist positions. Godwin in the United Kingdom, Bastiat in France for example.
But they weren’t “libertarians” as we know them today.
Libertarianism is based on another epistemology and another anthropology. Another definition of human science.
Its principles (methodological individualism, praxeology, catallaxy, etc) only allows “mechanism-based” explanations of social behavior.
It may refute the need for “social engineering”, but, in last analysis, they see society has an engine. Just an automotical auto-regulating one.
It would need a longer post, but right now, i need some sleep.
[/quote]
Okay I think I understand what you say, but since you need sleep we can take it another time.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
@florelius I am not going to argue with you . You have your points and I respect them :)[/quote]
Okay I understand, but I need to say my goal wasnt to argue, but to have a discourse and to throw some different perspectives out there and I welcome a discourse beetwen you and me on the subject of what a true conservative is or is not 