Who Supports the War(s)

[Radar]

Sycamore: It's more like this. We setup a booth with information pamphlets, stickers, signs, etc. and we enjoy the music. Someone comes by to ask what we're doing and we tell them we're trying to end the drug war and keep the government out of places they don't belong, like our wallets, bedrooms, and gun cabinets.

We sometimes have discussions regarding various Libertarian positions, we ask if they're registered to vote and if they aren't we offer to register them.

So much for "noninitiation of violence".

I wouldn't be initiating violence toward you or anyone else. It might be my own dick I slap. Who knows?

As long as we're exchanging advice, I would recommend if you are planning to assault me that you wear *good* quality body armor; I might have the +Ps in my side arm that day. Folks wear heavy clothing around here in the wintertime.

Gosh you're scary.

Don't worry, you'll know when I'm *really* making fun of you; it will be something like Overheard at the rave: "See that guy behind the bar? He's Mr E-Man. He does our 'youth outreach'. He'll take care of you." :-)

That wouldn't be much of an insult. While I don't use any drugs or sell any I don't see anything wrong with people who do. That's their personal choice and it's no more wrong than people who choose to be vegetarians. Nobody can tell anyone else what they may or may not consume, not even the government.

And the name isn't “Mr E-Man”. It's MrE Man as in Mystery Man you fucking twit.

How's about you allow guns, but restrict ammo?

Free people don't ask permission to own gun or ammo. People aren't GIVEN rights by the constitution. We're born with rights and the constitution merely defends those rights. The 2nd Amendment defends our right to own an unlimited number of guns of any type including fully automatic machine guns, with an unlimited amount of any type of ammunition including Teflon coated armor piercing hallow tipped rounds, without any permission from or notification to the government.

That's how I read it, anyway.

You read it correctly wolf. It's my way of introducing them to Libertarian ideas before they're corrupted or entirely turned off of politics by the two major parties.

*** NEWSFLASH FOR CAIRO ***

The bible IS THE WORD OF MEN AND NOT THE WORD OF GOD!!! It was written BY MEN hundreds of years after the fact. It's not historically factual, not an authority of any kind, and not any more important than any other religious text.

Radar congrats on the marriage

Thanks Cam. That's nice of you. I have a good friend named Cam. He's Vietnamese. So is my fiancé. I already speak some Spanish, and Japanese, and I'm currently working on Vietnamese, but it's much more difficult.

But Radar you specifically described dave as "wrong” you didn't say his statement was "wrong" you just said he was "wrong".

He was wrong in his false accusation. Not only was his statement wrong, but his actions were wrong. He himself was wrong.

Cam, don't get caught up in semantics so much that you miss the message. What I said regarding trivial things such as dietary restrictions in the grand scheme of things is truthful, honest, and insightful. Christianity is no more valid than Islam or any other religion because in the end it's all about the golden rule. I can recite bible verses with the best of them and show you how Jesus of Nazareth taught that church and state should remain separate. Or he Jesus of Nazareth taught that people shouldn't pray in public (in a public school or an official government meeting for instance), but would it change your mind?

I posted my personal beliefs. You have posted yours and I respect your right to do that. But when you claim that a religious text with more holes than Swiss cheese as historical fact I've got to call bullshit. I hope you'll understand. If you merely say it's your opinion that every word in the bible is true I lump you together with all the other Christian fundamentalists. But saying the Bible is historical fact is like claiming Peter Pan is non-fiction.

I'd rather have it disbanded in its prime anyway, instead of dwindling away like the LP.

The LP may have few less members, but we’ve got more members in elected office than ever before. It sounds like the members we still have are doing a better job at getting elected. Those that left were the equivalent of friends that don't attend your wedding because it's raining outside. Not much of a friend at all. Those that stayed (nearly all of them) were the friends that help you move.

The attrition rate for the LP is far lower than that of the major two parties. In fact normally the party is growing. It's just the last couple of years with highly questionable elections that have thrown things off a bit.

[Cairo]

Hi MaggieL,
I'm glad you brought up the "to deny that any "interpretation" at the hands of a human has taken place."...I never denied it because it has taken place, and that is the precise reason why I do not follow the new books.
The Dead Sea Scrolls prove beyond doubt that the Torah of today is word for word the Torah of Third Century B.C.E. because all these years it was translated at the hands of man...men who understood and feared the Wrath they would bring upon themselves if they "interpreted" what God meant. A sense of conscience, if you will, that is sorely lacking today.

Sure, the reader or listener applies the words of God to their own lives, to put forward their own understanding...to themselves. But the Bible itself is purely God's words and will, and is not subject to interpretation. The ones who do this, end up with a book of man's words and will....
And having to follow man's laws of this land alone, is enough for me!

[perth]

Currently in the VIP room, we have lots of cold beer, the finest wines, and a boatload of cheesesteaks from Jimmy's.

well, why didnt you say so in the first place? where do i sign?

~james

[Cam]

Christianity is no more valid than Islam or any other religion because in the end it's all about the golden rule. I can recite bible verses with the best of them and show you how Jesus of Nazareth taught that church and state should remain separate. Or he Jesus of Nazareth taught that people shouldn't pray in public (in a public school or an official government meeting for instance), but would it change your mind?

I completely agree with you that all religions are based around the golden rule. And I agree with you that all religions are equal. I'm catholic, but I find other religions interesting, especially Islam, which is so much like Christianity, it's scary once you get past anything to do with jihad.

When you say you can find passages that say something you want you do not comprehend the vastness of the bible. Anyone who wants to prove anything can probably something to back it up in the bible.

You say you can find passages where Jesus said do not pray in public, I'll agree in fact I'll even provide a link for you since you once again failed to provide any proof. Matthew 6 . Now see if you can prove your statement about church and state. I believe you but I want to see if you can do your own research.
I don't see how reciting these versus are going to change my mind about anything. We were not arguing these things.
Then you threw in this thing about me saying the bible is historical fact. Which if you read my statement from earlier in the thread you would see I specifically said it wasn't. It's a book of faith; it's based on historical events. Read the gospels, they don't agree on everything, but their general message is usually the same.

Cam, don't get caught up in semantics so much that you miss the message. What I said regarding trivial things such as dietary restrictions in the grand scheme of things is truthful, honest, and insightful.

I'm not caught up in the semantics, I'm pretty sure I got your message. You called everyone who disagrees with you wrong. You called us a bunch of idiots. And you made it perfectly clear you are "correct". I was just trying to helpfully point out that this probably isn't the best way to go about things. Being able to admit your wrong, listening to arguments, and not throwing other random bullshit out every time someone pokes a hole in your argument is something you definitely need to work on. I've just reread this board from when you joined and I noticed a few things. You provided very few facts, and just repeated what you said before and then threw something else out as a distraction technique. Nobody wants to listen to that.

[wolf]

originally posted by radar
You read it correctly wolf. It's my way of introducing them to Libertarian ideas before they're corrupted or entirely turned off of politics by the two major parties.

uh, radar, YOU might want to reread MY post, which actually was more on the order of speaking about libertine ideas rather than libertarian ones.

[MaggieL]

Originally posted by Cairo
Hi MaggieL,
I'm glad you brought up the "to deny that any "interpretation" at the hands of a human has taken place."... But the Bible itself is purely God's words and will, and is not subject to interpretation.

Well, you may be happy that I brought it up, but unfortunately you don't seem to understand what I said. Assuming for the moment that the original texts are in fact "God's word", they can not be understood by Man without interpretation; the very process of understanding language requires interpretation. To simply proclaim it "not subject to interpretation" betrays an ignorance of how language works.

My own belief is that the best understandings of the Transcendant and Her "works" use language only as a feeble adjunct, and maintain an awareness of and humilty about the functioning and limitations of language. I find religions based soley on veneration of ancient texts largely fall short of effectively conveying truth.

Wtttgenstein once said "Whereof one cannnot speak, thereof one must remain silent."

[Radar]

When you say you can find passages that say something you want you do not comprehend the vastness of the bible.

I do comprehend the "vastness". I don't think you comprehend the lack of accuracy, the holes in the bible, or the hypocrisy of those who claim to be Christians yet want to prayer in public schools, 10 commandments posted at courthouses, etc.

You say you can find passages where Jesus said do not pray in public, I'll agree in fact I'll even provide a link for you since you once again failed to provide any proof.

I have never failed to provide "proof". I gave my personal opinion about those who placed something as trivial as dietary restrictions on a par with not killing other people. The mere fact that I gave that opinion is all the proof you need. And I said I COULD provide you with bible verses but that there would be no point in doing so. Now step back and look at what I said again.

believe you but I want to see if you can do your own research.
I don't see how reciting these versus are going to change my mind about anything.

DUH!!!

That's exactly what I said in the first place. I do more than my own research. I do it for most other people and I provide sources whenever I make factual statements. If it's a statement of opinion, I am the source. I already said there was no point in me providing bible verses when they wouldn't change your mind. You're obviously a Christian fundamentalist. My personal opinion is that Americans are in far more danger from these people than from any "jihad" from even the most twisted group of Muslim extremists. I am the source for my opinion. So don't claim I'm not giving sources.

You called everyone who disagrees with you wrong. You called us a bunch of idiots. And you made it perfectly clear you are "correct"

Everyone who disagrees with me having a personal opinion is wrong.

was just trying to helpfully point out that this probably isn't the best way to go about things.

Wow, you're such a giver. How helpful of you. I'm here to win arguments, not friends. Perhaps I could do it in a different way, but that's not my style.

Being able to admit your wrong, listening to arguments, and not throwing other random bullshit out every time someone pokes a hole in your argument is something you definitely need to work on.

Given that I've only been wrong once since I got here and admitted it when given a verifiable source you're lying. I've also provided sources for everything I've said. And you can't point out a single hole in my arguments. Try again.

You provided very few facts, and just repeated what you said before and then threw something else out as a distraction technique. Nobody wants to listen to that.

<BZZZZ> Thanks for playing we've got some lovely parting gifts for you. I have repeated myself only when it was clear someone was so thickheaded they didn't get it the first time. I've never used "distraction techniques" either. Perhaps you can provide an example of this as proof unless you want to do what you're falsely accusing me of doing.

Nobody is listening to me Einstein. They are reading what I've written and nobody is forcing them to do so. You don't speak or write for everyone on this board. And even if you did it wouldn't matter to me.

I've got nothing against you Cairo. You seem like a fairly decent person. I'm just trying to point out that the bible isn't a "historical journey" or "instructions by god" him/her self as you claim. But since you're so hung up on providing "proof" I'm sure you can provide measurable and verifiable proof that god exists. Not the deeds you attribute to god like, "look at the world around us", but evidence that an actual entity of god exists. Perhaps you can provide measurable and verifiable proof that gods own hand wrote the bible and not the hands of men.

I'm all about providing proof now. Give me some actual evidence that isn't circular like most Christian logic. Give me some physical proof that the entity of god exists (not deeds you attribute to god) and I will become a Christian.

And since you want me to provide bible verses despite the fact that we both agree it won't change your mind here goes.

Jesus and the separation of church and state:

John 2:13-16

Matthew 22:19-22


Jesus and public prayer:

Matthew 6:5-6

Matthew 26:36


Jesus and hypocrisy:

Matthew 7:3-5


I could go on and on but we've both agreed that there is no point.

[Cam]

I got a question, who exactly what the post directed at. I'm confused, you quoted me, then stated that you have nothing against Cairo.

[juju]

Originally posted by Radar
The 2nd Amendment defends our right to own an unlimited number of guns of any type including fully automatic machine guns, with an unlimited amount of any type of ammunition including Teflon coated armor piercing hallow tipped rounds, without any permission from or notification to the government.

It doesn't say "guns", it says "arms". Should we also assert our right to an unlimited amount of flamethrowers, rocketlaunchers, grenades, and nuclear missles?

[slang]

Originally posted by juju

It doesn't say "guns", it says "arms". Should we also assert our right to an unlimited amount of flamethrowers, rocketlaunchers, grenades, and nuclear missles?

I think you should have special a permit for nukes. Possibly a waiting period also. All the others hardware though should only require the PICS (Pa instant check system) and an ATF4473 (the yellow sheet you fill out for a firearm purchase).

In many states you can still legally own machine guns/full auto rifles. The requirements are a clean record (no felonies) the fee for the special permit ($200) and you must actually purchase a full auto to get the permit. The full autos arent cheap, 2k to 100k.

I dont know if the ATF grants permits for "destructive devices" such as handgrenades.

[juju]

Originally posted by slang
I think you should have special a permit for nukes. Possibly a waiting period also.

Permit, schmermit. It's my constitutional right!

[warch]

Cairo, I heartily disagree with you on the Texas history book revisions! ¡Pienso su magnífico! Thanks for letting me know about it! Often I only hear about revisions that attack evolution or that insist on bluring the nudity of landmark statues.

[slang]

Originally posted by juju

Permit, schmermit. It's my constitutional right!

Nukes are a little different from the other weapons. Where exactly would I "target practice" with a nuke? It may be our constitutional right to own them but the cost and power makes them too impractical.

A good 155mm howitzer on a mobile platform might be nice though. I think they are called Palladins. They sell for (? guessing ?) 2.5 mil a piece. PLUS you get machine guns with the package. Now this is practical, the nukes are not.

<a href="http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m109a6.htm"> Now this is a good investment. </a>Good commincations sysems, NBC (nuclear,biological,chemical) protection, and it totally eliminates your parking worries. What better vehicle could you ask for in this current environment of terrorism

[hermit22]

Thanks for pointing that link out warch, since Cairo refused to bother to do so. I have no idea what she sees wrong with providing a supplement that will connect students to history. Would she care to explain?

[elSicomoro]

In all fairness, when I did a few searches for the "rewrite" deal, the link to the Houston situation was all I could find.