|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Why are the tea partiers so angry?
|
churchgeek
Have candles, will pray
# 5557
|
Posted
Sorry to triple post ![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif) but reading through this thread is reminding me of some passages in Charles Peirce's essay, "Evolutionary Love" . He weaves a lot of different strands into his argument that love is the engine behind evolution, and 19th-century economics is one of them. (He's writing right around the turn of the 19th to 20th centuries.)
Here's a relevant excerpt:
quote:
The Origin of Species of Darwin merely extends politico-economical views of progress to the entire realm of animal and vegetable life. [...] Among animals, the mere mechanical individualism is vastly reenforced as a power making for good by the animal's ruthless greed. As Darwin puts it on his title-page, it is the struggle for existence; and he should have added for his motto: Every individual for himself, and the Devil take the hindmost! Jesus, in his sermon on the Mount, expressed a different opinion. [...] The gospel of Christ says that progress comes from every individual merging his individuality in sympathy with his neighbors. On the other side, the conviction of the nineteenth century is that progress takes place by virtue of every individual's striving for himself with all his might and trampling his neighbor under foot whenever he gets a chance to do so. This may accurately be called the Gospel of Greed.
--------------------
I reserve the right to change my mind.
My article on the Virgin of Vladimir
Posts: 7773 | From: Detroit | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
churchgeek, I commend you for taking this discussion in a spiritual direction. I was going to say moral but I think that word has been co-opted.
The whole, I've-got-mine-what's-wrong-with-you-and-your-fascist-president argument doesn't seem to have much support in scripture or spiritual thinking.
While we can respect that there will be various ways to interpret what governments should be doing, the venom currently applied to the President doesn't seem to related to 1) the same issues when encountered under previous adminsitrations, and 2) any kind of compassionate spiritual response to being brothers and sisters to one another in this world.
Today is World Refugee Day. I just spent the afternoon with people who fled true dictatorship and oppression, not to mention dreams destroyed. They would be truly shocked to hear such claims being made about President Obama by folks who have so much and seem to take it for granted.
sabine
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
MerlintheMad
Shipmate
# 12279
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by churchgeek:
...As an aside, Merlin, if you believe we should all pay our taxes and obey the laws, then what is it that you want the government to stop doing when you say it should mind its own business and leave us alone? I'm not sure what the government is doing besides making and enforcing laws, and collecting and dispensing tax money. Well, that and national defense, which we all agree requires a government to handle.
I want gov't to stop encroaching on personal property; making noise about how the unfair differences in the amount of property ought to be eliminated; increasing entitlements; operating higher taxation while increasing the national debt; making noise about how obsolescent/misinterpreted the Constitution has become (His Oness is guilty of all of these and more)....
Posts: 3499 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MerlintheMad:
I want gov't to stop.... increasing entitlements....
Others on this thread have pointed out one of the fallacies of the tea party (and like-minded) arguments about entitlements. As long as they have theirs, then fine; but don't go giving them to anyone else.
You have posted on this thread that your family benefitted from Medicaid (an entitlement) and yet, here you are, calling for a reduction in the very type of thing you've taken advantage of. This appears to be a hypocritical stand to take.
As I said in my reply to churchgeek, I know people who have actually suffered at the hands of dictators and those who would "encroach" on their very persons (as in torture, burning down their property, etc.)
The arguments raised on this thread about how our government (or rather, our President) takes so much from US citizens pale in comparison.
sabine
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MerlintheMad:
[QUOTE]]I like this game. You could be describing yourself or someone you know. Surely this set of "Jonah curses" is occurring all around us. It is one of the reasons why Medicaid and Medicare got established. Medicaid saved my ass. My story:
...There was never a chance of being actually homeless. Even your example case isn't going to be homeless and starving on the street. There is a safety net available, even if NO other options (e.g. family, friends, church, community) are there to take the brunt of the series of disasters and save the family. The kids won't go hungry or unclothed; there will be somewhere to keep everyone warm and dry; there will be plenty of food. But, if this unfortunate bread-winner must resort of some hypothetical gov't "work house" in order to qualify, so be it: s/he'd best be up and at it as quickly as possible....
Simply not true.
You were fortunate to find the right combination of government benefits available to you, fully funded and w/o excessive wait listing, at the time you needed them.
This is not always true. I work with the homeless here in LA. We do not have enough beds for all the homeless we have seeking help on any given night. We do not have enough meals for all the children needing to be fed on any given night. There are government programs, yes, but they are subject to all sorts of political vagarities that cause the funding to go up & down. We have volunteers who have been working in this arena for decades, who know the ins and outs of the social welfare system. Sometimes they are able to match the particularities of a person's situation to a government program with funding and get them help, most times they are not.
I notice that your government aid came before the cuts that came into play during the Reagan era, btw. That's a clue. The Perot reference is apt: you got your bail out and (prudently) used it to build a nice safety net-- now it's time to slam the door shut for everyone else.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Josephine
Orthodox Belle
# 3899
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MerlintheMad:
operating higher taxation while increasing the national debt.... (His Oness is guilty of all of these and more)
Maybe you didn't notice that Obama cut taxes for nearly everyone? It's true. He did.
And he didn't roll back the Bush tax cuts for the very rich.
The national debt is increasing because, during a severe recession, the government's expenses go up (more people need things like unemployment compensation and Medicaid), and the government's income goes down (far less tax is collected during a downturn). Nearly all economists will tell you that, if you try to maintain a balanced budget during a recession, you are certain to make the recession worse. Which would mean even more need for things like unemployment compensation and even less tax revenue. Deficit spending is needed to stop the downward spiral.
Once the economy is growing again, we can balance the budget.
--------------------
I've written a book! Catherine's Pascha: A celebration of Easter in the Orthodox Church. It's a lovely book for children. Take a look!
Posts: 10273 | From: Pacific Northwest, USA | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Josephine:
The national debt is increasing because, during a severe recession, the government's expenses go up...
The public also needs to perceive that the government is trying not to overspend. Funding innumerable wars and still calling for lower taxes for the highest contributors caused the bulk of the population to think twice when casting their 2008 ballots.
The TEA Party has yet to address this issue; it seems that they will pick up as it was in early 08--spending as much as they want, and throwing the economy into further turmoil by not even trying to finance their spending. Few people fall for this anymore.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MerlintheMad:
I want gov't to stop ... increasing entitlements;
Define "increasing entitlements".
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
The only way Obama has permanently increased entitlements is with health care. We know from past entitlement programs that it will end up costing far more than what it was originally projected to cost. Already the projections are going up and it hasn't even started.
How you feel about that depends on how you feel about the health care plan. Most people in the United States oppose it for various reasons. Most if not all tea partiers are among the opposed.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
How you feel about that depends on how you feel about the health care plan. Most people in the United States oppose it for various reasons.
Actually, even that stat is questionable, as it seems to depend on how/when the survey is taken/worded. When asked about the details of the plan (as opposed to "how do you feel about the Obama health care plan?") most Americans respond positively. Which, too, seems to reflect the "Tea Party effect".
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
Plus a lot of the left are unhappy that the public option was taken off the table, so some of the polls reflect that dissatisfaction but not the reason behind it.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Merlin,
Speak to someone who has lived through a repressive regime. Say from communist China, North Korea, Myanmar, Sudan.... No American President has ever come close to enacting anything like what has happened there.
/minor tangent
I know a woman who worked for a state government program to help people find work. Her job was to keep people off the dole. When was her departments budget most under threat? Under the Republicans.
What kind of sense does this make? /end minor tangent
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
How you feel about that depends on how you feel about the health care plan. Most people in the United States oppose it for various reasons.
Actually, even that stat is questionable, as it seems to depend on how/when the survey is taken/worded. When asked about the details of the plan (as opposed to "how do you feel about the Obama health care plan?") most Americans respond positively. Which, too, seems to reflect the "Tea Party effect".
You mean they went point by point in the 3,000 page health care bill asking them if they approved of each point?
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
Why is it that the people most vociferous about the government "minding its own business" don't seem to care about the government minding our sexual/relational business, or the business of other sovereign nations abroad? Most people who claim to be libertarians aren't.
--------------------
Simul iustus et peccator
http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
True libertarians are non-interventionists and want the government to mind its own business on moral issues. Paleolibertarians are social conservatives but non-interventionists. The Tea Partiers want to focus on fiscal but no social issues though they are mostly social conservatives. On the other hand, they are mostly interventionist.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
True libertarians are non-interventionists and want the government to mind its own business on moral issues.
Such as murder? I think you are seeing a distinction between legal and moral which is drawn in practice by community decisions over those things agreed to be immoral which will or will not also classified as illegal. isn't that the sort of thing which governments of all kinds do? And people of good will argue about?
I think those who campaigned for a change of laws governing slavery in the US were both libertarians and interventionists.
But YMMV - these terms are defined in quite wobbly ways and there is much variation over meaning.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
I should at least think that the true libertarian would want most or all "victimless crimes" to be made legal. Many of these are "nanny state" laws that people decry, yet take little or no action to undo.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
True libertarians are non-interventionists and want the government to mind its own business on moral issues.
Such as murder? I think you are seeing a distinction between legal and moral which is drawn in practice by community decisions over those things agreed to be immoral which will or will not also classified as illegal. isn't that the sort of thing which governments of all kinds do? And people of good will argue about?
I think those who campaigned for a change of laws governing slavery in the US were both libertarians and interventionists.
But YMMV - these terms are defined in quite wobbly ways and there is much variation over meaning.
I think the issue is more Religious morals, esp. Christian.
Laws against murder, theft, etc. can be viewed as legislating morality. They can also be viewed from a practical point of view. Such as these are necessary for our coexisting in large groups. Or moral only in the extent we view harming others as wrong. The "morals" many tea partiers and conservatives wish to impose have no such imperative.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
Merlin,
Speak to someone who has lived through a repressive regime. Say from communist China, North Korea, Myanmar, Sudan.... No American President has ever come close to enacting anything like what has happened there.
lilBuddha--I work with refugees from conflict zones and have mentioned them twice on this thread. Neither Merlin nor anyone who has called Obama a fascist has responded. I think this is because they can't. There is simply no comparison.
sabine
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
And people called George W. Bush a fascist as well.
It probably made more sense as a way to slander Bush as opposed to Obama.
Pinko Commie Bastard would be the equivalent slur for Obama.
They do call him a socialist as well which coupled with fascist associates him with Hitler.
In one article, Pat Buchanan called him a Fabian Socialist. In some ways, that is close to being what he is.
[ 21. June 2010, 21:32: Message edited by: Beeswax Altar ]
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mere Nick
Shipmate
# 11827
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
True libertarians are non-interventionists and want the government to mind its own business on moral issues. Paleolibertarians are social conservatives but non-interventionists. The Tea Partiers want to focus on fiscal but no social issues though they are mostly social conservatives. On the other hand, they are mostly interventionist.
The Tea Partiers I am familiar with are true libertarians according to your definition. Some claim that the ones they know are different folks. All in all, it just seems to me they are folks still looking for "change you can believe in".
--------------------
"Well that's it, boys. I've been redeemed. The preacher's done warshed away all my sins and transgressions. It's the straight and narrow from here on out, and heaven everlasting's my reward."
Delmar O'Donnell
Posts: 2797 | From: West Carolina | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mere Nick
Shipmate
# 11827
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
True libertarians are non-interventionists and want the government to mind its own business on moral issues.
Such as murder? I think you are seeing a distinction between legal and moral which is drawn in practice by community decisions over those things agreed to be immoral which will or will not also classified as illegal. isn't that the sort of thing which governments of all kinds do? And people of good will argue about?
I think those who campaigned for a change of laws governing slavery in the US were both libertarians and interventionists.
But YMMV - these terms are defined in quite wobbly ways and there is much variation over meaning.
Murder? No, libertarians believe that the proper activity of government is to protect us from force and fraud.
--------------------
"Well that's it, boys. I've been redeemed. The preacher's done warshed away all my sins and transgressions. It's the straight and narrow from here on out, and heaven everlasting's my reward."
Delmar O'Donnell
Posts: 2797 | From: West Carolina | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mere Nick:
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
True libertarians are non-interventionists and want the government to mind its own business on moral issues.
Such as murder?
<snip>
I think those who campaigned for a change of laws governing slavery in the US were both libertarians and interventionists.
<snip>
Murder? No, libertarians believe that the proper activity of government is to protect us from force and fraud.
And murder is not force? Surely it is the clearest example of the ultimate use of force to deprive someone else of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".
Unless, that is, you are saying that murder is simply an example of the illegal use of force. But I take it that you mean the use of force by outsiders to deprive the US of "government of the people, by the people, for the people".
Well, why should the government of the people for the people by the people not be interested in such uses of force by those within the community. Interested enough to establish laws and the means of their reinforcement?
I don't get you.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
Ultimately I am as libertarian as they come, but I must also live in this world, so I know it's never going to happen. True US libertarians believe that one has the right to do pretty much whatever they want whenever they want, but that (to invoke an old cliché) your right to swing your fist ends at my nose. Maybe libertarians on the other side of the pond are different.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
Ultimately I am as libertarian as they come, but I must also live in this world, so I know it's never going to happen. True US libertarians believe that one has the right to do pretty much whatever they want whenever they want, but that (to invoke an old cliché) your right to swing your fist ends at my nose. Maybe libertarians on the other side of the pond are different.
From this side of the pond, I think I'd replace the word "right" by "freedom", Erin. There are proper limits to freedom when it comes to behaviour. I think the issue is that folks differ on the nature and extent of those limits. But nobody really argues for completely unbridled freedom, do they? Unless they believe anarchy is somehow the best.
There is a distinction between rights and freedoms. A focus on specific rights can lead to a plethora of legislation, whereas a focus on freedoms requires a proper justification of constraints. I think we say that constraints are necessary only when freedoms are abused to the damage or detriment of others. So we have laws limiting the freedom to swing the fist, which say, essentially, "you can do that of course but here are the consequences. You might not like them, but that's tough."
I'm pretty happy with the four freedoms. But I suppose that because they were articulated by FDR they might not go down well everywhere. FDR is hardly a Republican Party poster boy.
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Selling tainted food is fraud. But many libertarians I've heard think bodies like the USDA should be abolished, and "the market" allowed to determine if you buy, or die from, a given food product. Is that then not true libertarianism? Or misguided libertarianism?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Probably the best example of what true libertarians (I use that phrase for lack of a better way of distinguishing the various shades of libertarianism) want from the government is that of the nightwatchman. All true libertarians want the government to do is protect the individual and their property, punish those who harm other individuals or take their property, enforce contracts, and defend the nation from foreign aggression. The government should only be big enough to accomplish those tasks.
By interventionist, I mean interventionist in foreign affairs not interventionist in individual or state rights. True libertarians only believe in defensive wars. For them, the last just war was the War of 1812.
Regarding slavery, the best example of the libertarian abolitionist was Lysander Spooner. Spooner supported abolition of slaves. However, he believed the way to do it was to purchase the freedom of every slave in the South. On the other hand, he believed the states had the right to secede from the Union.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
By interventionist, I mean interventionist in foreign affairs not interventionist in individual or state rights. True libertarians only believe in defensive wars. For them, the last just war was the War of 1812.
Well, there goes any intellectual respectability I thought they still had.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Would you say all Pacifists lack intellectual respectability?
I had one professor in seminary who was a 2/3 Pacifist. He believed violence was justified only in direct self defense. He kept saying that until the tank was coming down your street violence was not justified. Nobody would ever mistake him for a libertarian. However, libertarians believe the exact same thing just for different reasons.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
You ask about pacifists then describe somebody who isn't, as if that proves some fact about pacifists. Both the 2/3 pacifist and the libertarian (if indeed they are as alike as you say) aren't so much lacking in intellectual respectability as in wisdom. Well, and compassion. If the only justifiable use of force is self-defense then the bullies rule the playground. The weak and those unable to defend themselves are left by the strong to be murdered, raped, enslaved by the other strong. If you think that's okay, then, well, yes, I don't respect your intellect. Or your morals. Or your courage. Or all 3.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leaf
Shipmate
# 14169
|
Posted
On US President Obama and name-calling: I noted an interesting version of this. Two black actors were sitting in a bar in Tennessee when a "self-proclaimed redneck" indicated them and said,
"I want them Obamas outta here."
The line became part of a theatre project the actors were working on. Article here.
Posts: 2786 | From: the electrical field | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
your right to swing your fist ends at my nose.
This is a considerably more complex statement than many who utter it realize.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
RadicalWhig
Shipmate
# 13190
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
your right to swing your fist ends at my nose.
This is a considerably more complex statement than many who utter it realize.
It also reveals the shallowness of the libertarian view of the State (and its rejection of a "greater good"); rather than just stopping those hands from hitting noses, couldn't we put them to good work? Rather than just limiting to protect individual rights, could we not co-ordinate for common goods?
--------------------
Radical Whiggery for Beginners: "Trampling on the Common Prayer Book, talking against the Scriptures, commending Commonwealths, justifying the murder of King Charles I, railing against priests in general." (Sir Arthur Charlett on John Toland, 1695)
Posts: 3193 | From: Scotland | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
He believed violence was justified only in direct self defense.
This strikes me as extremely naive.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
tobity
Apprentice
# 15684
|
Posted
I've attended a tea party hosted by Glenn Beck in San Antonio. It was awesome. We are a bunch of freedom loving Americans who hate big government. I'd rather die free then be enslaved to the state. Don't touch my family, faith or guns! I don't want a bunch of feds dictating how I live my life. FREEDOM!!!!
Posts: 29 | From: texas | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
tobity
Apprentice
# 15684
|
Posted
Individual pursuits trump the common good in a fallen world. It is naive to believe that those entrusted with power will not put themselves first. Trust in God and self, not the state. Fend for yourself or shut the $!#@ up you little bitch. Ha ha!
Posts: 29 | From: texas | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
All true libertarians want the government to do is protect the individual...
Protect the individual from what?
...physical violence?
...being robbed?
...being enslaved?
...losing their job?
...serious illness?
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tobity:
I'd rather die free then be enslaved to the state. Don't touch my family, faith or guns! I don't want a bunch of feds dictating how I live my life. FREEDOM!!!!
So speaks someone who can actually afford to decide how to live his life. And who clearly doesn't give a fuck about those less fortunate than himself...
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
RadicalWhig
Shipmate
# 13190
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tobity:
Individual pursuits trump the common good in a fallen world.
That's a little defeatist, isn't it? Surely we should be redeeming the world? Or doesn't your soteriology allow that?
quote:
It is naive to believe that those entrusted with power will not put themselves first.
Not really, no. Haven't you heard of a "public service ethic"? Or accountability? A well-constituted State is designed to ensure that power is exercised virtuously and for the public good.
quote:
Trust in God and self, not the state.
Well, the State is one of the instruments through which we do that which needs to be done to take care of ourselves and each other; within the Christian tradition the State exercises a "ministry" of care.
quote:
Fend for yourself or shut the $!#@ up you little bitch. Ha ha!
Don't shoot yourself on the way out.
--------------------
Radical Whiggery for Beginners: "Trampling on the Common Prayer Book, talking against the Scriptures, commending Commonwealths, justifying the murder of King Charles I, railing against priests in general." (Sir Arthur Charlett on John Toland, 1695)
Posts: 3193 | From: Scotland | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tobity:
Individual pursuits trump the common good in a fallen world. It is naive to believe that those entrusted with power will not put themselves first. Trust in God and self, not the state. Fend for yourself or shut the $!#@ up you little bitch. Ha ha!
Which Gospel did Jesus say all this in? Trust in self? Individual pursuits? Fend for yourself? Whatever this is, it is diametrically opposed to Christianity.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
sabine
Shipmate
# 3861
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
quote:
Originally posted by tobity:
Individual pursuits trump the common good in a fallen world. It is naive to believe that those entrusted with power will not put themselves first. Trust in God and self, not the state. Fend for yourself or shut the $!#@ up you little bitch. Ha ha!
Which Gospel did Jesus say all this in? Trust in self? Individual pursuits? Fend for yourself? Whatever this is, it is diametrically opposed to Christianity.
The "gospel" of Glen Beck is not good news for anyone but Glen Beck's accountant.
sabine
--------------------
"Hunger looks like the man that hunger is killing." Eduardo Galeano
Posts: 5887 | From: the US Heartland | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
tobity
Apprentice
# 15684
|
Posted
Newflash: Jesus kingdom is not of this world...the king is absent so is the kingdom.
Posts: 29 | From: texas | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Selling tainted food is fraud. But many libertarians I've heard think bodies like the USDA should be abolished, and "the market" allowed to determine if you buy, or die from, a given food product. Is that then not true libertarianism? Or misguided libertarianism?
No, it's true libertarianism, but it can't be done in this world, because too many people are dishonest and would take advantage. THAT is the issue here. Like I said before, at heart I'm a libertarian, but there is no way it is logical in this world as long as there are assholes. And there are plenty of assholes.
quote:
Originally posted by RadicalWhig:
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
quote:
Originally posted by Erin:
your right to swing your fist ends at my nose.
This is a considerably more complex statement than many who utter it realize.
It also reveals the shallowness of the libertarian view of the State (and its rejection of a "greater good"); rather than just stopping those hands from hitting noses, couldn't we put them to good work? Rather than just limiting to protect individual rights, could we not co-ordinate for common goods?
Wow, the point is standing in front of you and screaming and you still totally miss it. Libertarians believe that no one should be compelled to do anything for the greater good. That should flow naturally from not being an asshole, rather than coerced out of you by the government. The decision to "co-ordinate for the common goods" should be up to the individual, not a faceless government agency.
At any rate, it's not workable in a world full of self-indulgent assholes. So libertarians with any common sense sigh a lot over what it should be and then get on with what it is.
quote:
Originally posted by tobity:
I've attended a tea party hosted by Glenn Beck in San Antonio. It was awesome. We are a bunch of freedom loving Americans who hate big government. I'd rather die free then be enslaved to the state. Don't touch my family, faith or guns! I don't want a bunch of feds dictating how I live my life. FREEDOM!!!!
You're aware that Glenn Beck doesn't believe the rhetoric he gets you to spout, right? He said so himself.
At any rate, how is Obama "touching" your family? Your faith? Your guns? Can you point to a single piece of legislation that "touches" any of them?
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tobity
Apprentice
# 15684
|
Posted
Jesus said we will always have the poor...
Charity: sharing your money as you will
Big Government: spending others money as it wills
Posts: 29 | From: texas | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
Of course it's hard to understand how anybody could take Glenn Beck seriously, but it's especially hard to understand how lovers of Jesus could possibly think he's anything but twisted. This is the man who said
quote:
I'm begging you, your right to religion and freedom to exercise religion and read all of the passages of the Bible as you want to read them and as your church wants to preach them . . . are going to come under the ropes in the next year. If it lasts that long it will be the next year. I beg you, look for the words 'social justice' or 'economic justice' on your church Web site. If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words. Now, am I advising people to leave their church? Yes.
Compare this to these words
quote:
"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'
"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'
"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'
"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'
"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'
"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'
"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."
But if serving the LORD seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your forefathers served beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the LORD."
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tobity
Apprentice
# 15684
|
Posted
Erin: some pastors don't believe in Christ, that doesn't make the message any less true. By the way Beck is just a figurehead of a constiutionally based movement in God's second favorite nation!
Posts: 29 | From: texas | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tobity:
Jesus said we will always have the poor...
This is an excuse to fuck them over? Unbe-fucking-lievable.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Erin
Meaner than Godzilla
# 2
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tobity:
Erin: some pastors don't believe in Christ, that doesn't make the message any less true. By the way Beck is just a figurehead of a constiutionally based movement in God's second favorite nation!
Israel being the first, no doubt.
Still, I ask again: please point out the legislation that is "touching" your family, your faith, and/or your guns. Thank you.
--------------------
Commandment number one: shut the hell up.
Posts: 17140 | From: 330 miles north of paradise | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
tobity
Apprentice
# 15684
|
Posted
Free markets, free speech, but no free lunch! If a man doesn't work he doesn't eat. In other words...get off your ass.
Posts: 29 | From: texas | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tobity:
Free markets, free speech, but no free lunch! If a man doesn't work he doesn't eat. In other words...get off your ass.
Where does Jesus say this? Oh wait you don't believe in Jesus, you believe in Glenn Beck, who said "leave your church". Never mind.
How can a man work if there aren't enough jobs? Why don't the rich, who have the ability, provide jobs for those without them? Could it be .... selfishness? Gee, what did Jesus say about selfishness? Not what Glenn Beck said, I can assure you that.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
