|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3..6..9..12..14~15~16~17 [Next] | ||||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21263 Posts 
|
Quote:
On 2013-01-15 19:40, Steve_Mollett wrote: Ahhh yes the "other guy did it" syndrome we see so much from political parties. Gotta love it don't you?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
Steve_Mollett Inner circle Eh, so I've made 3006 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-01-21 16:50, Dannydoyle wrote: To quote Woody Allen: "What do you mean?"
Author of: GARROTE ESCAPES
The absurd is the essential concept and the first truth. - Albert Camus |
|||||||||
|
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21263 Posts
|
I mean that just because the native Americans did it to each other it doesn't make it ok for anyone else to do it. The idea that someone else did it somehow makes it ok or mitigates it is folly.
Political parties constantly get caught doing something bad and then their supporters say "well so and so did this and you didn't complain". (Mind you not any particular political party.) Nobody wants to take responsability for their own actions.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
|
Woland Special user 680 Posts
|
My point was, Dannydoyle, why single out one nation, for doing what all nations do?
|
|||||||||
|
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21263 Posts
|
I know the point. But it is the equivalent of saying "but officer everyone was speeding."
How about single out one nation because we are supposed to be better?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
|
landmark Inner circle within a triangle 5194 Posts
|
Danny, you're getting me nervous. Human Events is going to cancel your subscription if you're not careful.
Click here to get Gerald Deutsch's Perverse Magic: The First Sixteen Years
All proceeds to Open Heart Magic charity. |
|||||||||
|
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21263 Posts
|
Yea I know. I already lost my secret decoder ring.
But if we are going to tout being "exceptional" it is my feeling we should be so in every aspect.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
|
Steve_Mollett Inner circle Eh, so I've made 3006 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-01-23 12:48, Dannydoyle wrote: :applause:
Author of: GARROTE ESCAPES
The absurd is the essential concept and the first truth. - Albert Camus |
|||||||||
kambiz Inner circle Perth, down by the cool of the pool 1129 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-01-23 12:48, Dannydoyle wrote: ....or at the very least, show purity of intent to "strive" to be "more exceptional" today than we were yesterday.... (thats an eternal process btw  )
Kam
If I speak forth, many a mind will shatter,
And if I write, many a pen will break. .....and when I consider my own self, lo, I find it coarser than clay! |
|||||||||
|
Woland Special user 680 Posts
|
Wonderful and important to strive to be the best in every aspect. But no nation should be singled out to be condemned, or destroyed, because it is not perfect in every respect, does not have a perfect history in every respect, and does not have a population who are individually and collectively better than anyone else in the world in every respect.
|
|||||||||
|
landmark Inner circle within a triangle 5194 Posts
|
Nor does it give them a pass to continue repugnant behavior.
Click here to get Gerald Deutsch's Perverse Magic: The First Sixteen Years
All proceeds to Open Heart Magic charity. |
|||||||||
|
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21263 Posts
|
Yea Woland if you want to get all Bible about it look at James 14. It speaks of knowing the right thing to do and still choosing the wrong thing. Or it is a "sin of omission". Note the first word SIN please. Means it is bad.
We should not try to hold the world to our standards and values. Matter of fact we should simply live our own values, and let the world see them for what they are. Live by example and if others want they will follow that example. We are not being singled out to be destroyed. But condemned on occasion we certainly deserve it. Temporary custodians of federal offices have done things that absolutely NEED to be condemned. After all they represent US! If they act in a repugnant manner, they DESERVE to be condenmed. "My country right or wrong" does not fly with me. (Great there goes my ticket to the next republican inauguration for President. Which the way they have been doing things might be after my 90th birthday.)
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
|
landmark Inner circle within a triangle 5194 Posts
|
The full quote is:
“My country, right or wrong; if right, to be kept right; and if wrong, to be set right.” http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/my_country,_right_or_wrong
Click here to get Gerald Deutsch's Perverse Magic: The First Sixteen Years
All proceeds to Open Heart Magic charity. |
|||||||||
|
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21263 Posts
|
I know, but like most quotes it is chopped and sliced and parsed in order to fit the needs of the person remembering it.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
ViolinKing Veteran user a loyal user has no more than 307 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-01-19 15:03, LobowolfXXX wrote: This has to be addressed. I posted some very good comments which were overlooked. I never mentioned a threat to voting rights, I posed a question and it was overlooked. What right does man have to elect? Its like there's this tone of lazy contempt running through these responses, as if having a glance at what I wrote is enough to justify the response. "I don't expect my right to vote to be stripped." But, and here I would like to use some kind of ad hominem insult, what about my question? What on earth does that have to do with my question? What right does man have to elect? The process of election is democratic, which means man has no right to elect, only the right to vote. And even despite having completely missed my question, I can still think of ways in which the right to vote can at least be turned in someone's favor. In other words, sure, the right to vote will never be stripped from you, but the right to have your vote count can. And now I imagine there will be some more lazy contemptuous response to this. |
|||||||||
|
LobowolfXXX Inner circle La Famiglia 1196 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-02-12 15:00, ViolinKing wrote: Seriously, you're going to play the "What on earth does that have to do with my question?" card? My initial post was in response to the following: Quote:
On 2013-01-19 13:23, ViolinKing wrote: My reply was pretty succinct and self-contained: Quote:
On 2013-01-19 13:29, LobowolfXXX wrote: Somehow, you've extended my rather clear, two-sentence post into a discussion in which I'm now supposed to construct a political philosophy argument? I mean, that's all well and good, but if you're moving us from here to there, I don't think you can later use the "What on earth does that have to do with my question?" card. What on earth does the right to elect have to do with my brief comments about Mr. Anderson? Moving on...perhaps I'm not on your page with respect to your use of the word "elect." I took it to be in the sense of voting for political representatives. Yet you say, "I never mentioned a threat to voting rights," so I'm not so sure. Because while my comment "I don't expect my right to vote to be stripped" didn't apply to your question, it most certainly DID apply to your (italicized portion of the following excerpt) statement (as I understood it): "The question will be, what right does man have to elect, and I can guarantee you that the answers you have will not be good enough to convince those who would strip you of that" I'm not sure how you can have written that and then act as if my response about my right to vote being stripped is somehow a non sequitur. Moving on even further...what right does man have to elect? Good question! Although I'm not sure where a suggestion that he doesn't have a right to elect would come from. I think a more problematic question would be what right man has to impose the majority's beliefs upon the minority. Perhaps it's not a matter of "right" but of preference. Or maybe it's a matter of the right to govern one's own affairs + the right to delegate one's rights to others. If you ask what right one has to govern one's own affairs, ultimately, my belief is that some rights, like transcendent morality, is simply inherent in the universe. It's not a position that's subject to proof or even rational analysis, of course; however, many things that cannot be proven are nevertheless true. That's where my intellect and moral intuition leads me.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley. "...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us." |
|||||||||
|
ViolinKing Veteran user a loyal user has no more than 307 Posts
|
I can't get away from this tone of lazy contempt. Sarcasm or irony in your post when you say "seriously?" then over exaggerating verbiage with 'construct a political philosophy' in order to paint my dialogue as requiring monumental effort, a question I've already answered asked again, "What on earth does the right to elect have to do with my brief comments about Mr. Anderson?," then finally you say something that sounds like you're interested in talking ("I'm not sure how you can have written that and then act as if my response about my right to vote being stripped is somehow a non sequitur.") and I'm not even sure if I can believe it.
Again I ask, what better place is there to start a discussion about the violence against women act than with government? The topic of this thread is the violence against women act, and nothing is going to be done about it without some substantial discussion about government. Regardless, the motive for resurrecting this thread had to do with being able to see how someone could strip you of your right to elect. It doesn't even matter if I'm wrong, in my case because I don't vote. How can anyone consider themselves a citizen if they don't have a clear idea of what it means to elect? The words 'right to elect' went into your head and came out 'right to vote.' But really, it was not important to me whether or not I was misunderstood, what was interesting was the seeming emotional confidence that came with the statement that you doubt your right to vote could ever be taken, Its such a blase attitude, too overconfident. In another context, I could see it being just what it is, a factual statement. In a thread about the violence against women act, it seems like a dismissal of anything threatening the American way of life. If that confidence is factual, then what more can be said on the subject? It sums up to 'the government is working perfectly, and the violence against women act was stripped of funds because that is what the people wanted.' |
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts
|
Frankly, after graduating law school and practicing for over a decade, I NEVER have heard the phrase "right to elect." Would you please explain exactly what that means? (The only logical meaning I can think of is that it is the right to ELECT whoever you want, regardless of the result of voting. And that makes no sense as it would subvert the entire meaning of voting in the first place.)
Not trying to argue, just want to understand what you mean. |
|||||||||
|
ViolinKing Veteran user a loyal user has no more than 307 Posts
|
Since I've been hearing all of this discussion about the second amendment, I've gone back to what I think is the more important feature, which is the right to vote. Some say that the second amendment doesn't even allow for citizens to own guns. Could the same thinking be applied to voting?
It's a rhetorical question. Lobowolf seems confident that his right to vote will never be stripped. I don't know what that means, but what I do know is that Lobowolf is confident in his knowledge of the political process. What does it mean, right to elect, right to vote? Its a long thread, and I know that you haven't read all of it, because I've gone into great detail here about how creating a government based on the right to vote allows for the possibility that a population will vote away their right to vote. In that situation, what exactly is "the entire meaning of voting." My own ungraduated intellect can come up with a few scenarios in which the right to vote means nothing. What is the legal age? What criteria are applied? Are prisoners or convicts allowed to vote? A very simplistic response from Lobowolf seems to deny that there is any possibility whatsoever that the right to vote could be rendered meaningless. I can think of a few ways. Instead of anyone having any concrete knowledge on what voting is, everyone seems to be either ironically quizzical, or lazily contemptuous. I tell you, this thread is filled with my ideas. I can't really bring myself to copy and paste them. Fundamentally, the second amendment creates a right. Starting at the top of this post, you can see that much public debate has gone into what exactly that right is. Could the same be applied to voting. I say yes, and I don't even feel all that concerned saying it, yet the response I get from Lobowolf seems too self confident. I don't think its pessimistic or paranoid to simply consider the possibility. |
|||||||||
|
ViolinKing Veteran user a loyal user has no more than 307 Posts
|
I'll be a little more clear. I don't think there will be a day when Lobowolf will go to a voting booth and be denied.
I do think that there are tiny changes that could be made to the interpretation of the law that would greatly impact what it means to vote. Be creative. Lobowolf seems to think that the only way his vote could be undermined is by taking it away. Tipping the scales could be a lot easier than that. |
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Violence Against Women Act (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3..6..9..12..14~15~16~17 [Next] | ||||||||||
Posted: Jan 21, 2013 09:50 pm 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.09 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
|
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < 
|