Wild West Welfare

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Takiji, Apr 12, 2014.

  1. clembo

    clembo Well-Known Member

    By whom?

    Seems I asked that question a long time go and got no real answer.
     
  2. Recusant
    Spaced

    Recusant Member

    It's rare that I think you make a good point, CoindOKC, but in this instance I definitely agree with what you've posted. You seem to have strange moments of lucidity every once in a while. :eek:
     
  3. CoinOKC
    Yeehaw

    CoinOKC T R U M P 2 0 2 4

    Yes, thank you. Usually from noon to midnight and then again from midnight to noon. :cool:
     
  4. clembo

    clembo Well-Known Member

    Nor have I and no I don't Coin.

    Still I figure he owes some bucks. I further figure he has for years. I even further figure it won't be hard to prove.

    Do you have a point here?

    Your desperation is growing.
     
  5. CoinOKC
    Yeehaw

    CoinOKC T R U M P 2 0 2 4

    You say you don't have insight into his personal finances, but at the same time you say he owes money. Uhhh.. OK. Let's just say that I'm happy you're not my accountant.
     
  6. rlm's cents
    Hot

    rlm's cents Well-Known Member

    Everyone who has posted in this thread that I am aware of.
     
  7. JoeNation
    No Mood

    JoeNation The ReichWing Abuser

    How exactly is a "right to believe" NOT a right in your opinion? A belief can't be granted or taken away but a right can be. Don't confuse the two. Bundy has a belief that is plain and simple racist. It's not a matter of his right to believe whatever he wants, he certainly can believe whatever he wants to believe without anyone granting him that "right". A right requires the addition of responsibility while a belief requires nothing. I do believe Bundy can think whatever he wants but elevating his beliefs to a right supports whatever he chooses to believe even if only indirectly. Supporting someone's beliefs makes you complicit in those beliefs.
     
    2 people like this.
  8. Takiji

    Takiji Well-Known Member

    They go on and on about their "right" to think this or believe that being threatened as if it were possible to prohibit them from thinking, or stop them from believing in something. What they are really talking about is some imaginary right to express those beliefs without having to face any pushback from people who disagree with them.
     
    2 people like this.
  9. JoeNation
    No Mood

    JoeNation The ReichWing Abuser

    Exactly, I will even go as far as saying that they can express whatever belief they happen to have but I will not defend their statements as rights. That completely misses the point that a belief, right or wrong, is still just a belief. I'll defend someone's rights but not their beliefs. Its just the Right wing's way of avoiding the real issue of the content of the beliefs the can't defend.
     
  10. justafarmer

    justafarmer Well-Known Member

    No - that is incorrect - being the right also extends to those that disagree and their right to express it. I'll defend that also. I may not support or agree with your views but I'll sure defend your right to express them.
     
    2 people like this.
  11. JoeNation
    No Mood

    JoeNation The ReichWing Abuser

    I will not support freely expressed views as a "right" of anyone if those views either harm society, lead others to harm society, or demean people for demographic characteristics they cannot change. In an open and free society, rights come with implied responsibilities and if someone chooses to ignore or is too damn ignorant or even too stubborn to take responsibility for their own beliefs, they deserve neither the freedom to express their beliefs publicly nor do they have the freedom to call their beliefs rights. Willful ignorance cannot be treated the same as any right. It isn't. If you choose not to educate yourself out of sheer ignorant beliefs, society owes you zero deference for your beliefs. Calling their beliefs "rights" only perpetuates their ignorance.
     
  12. CoinOKC
    Yeehaw

    CoinOKC T R U M P 2 0 2 4

    You'll have to define the terms "harm society" and "lead others to harm society". Those are pretty broad terms. Society is defined as an aggregate group of people living together in a more or less organized community. Our system of government is what organizes our society, but our very own Constitution gives us the ability to completely destroy our system of government and change it (or harm it, if you will) if we so choose. Now, if you're talking about harming PEOPLE in society, no, nothing gives you the right to physically harm them.

    OF COURSE they deserve the freedom to express their beliefs publicly! They even have the right to call their beliefs "rights"! They have the right to be ignorant and you have the right to ignore them. But, you're treading on unstable ground when you say that they don't deserve the freedom to express their beliefs publicly. Every one of us has that inherent freedom which is, thankfully, guaranteed by the Constitution.

    You're still not getting it. No one is saying they're the same. However, I'm saying that a person has the right to be ignorant. Huge difference.

    Agreed. However, the person still has the right to be believe as he wishes. Whether or not those beliefs are ignorant is completely immaterial to his right to believe.

    You must not have read my earlier post, so I'll state it again. No one is equating a "belief" to a "right". But, a person has the right to believe what they want. Do you see the difference?
     
    2 people like this.
  13. justafarmer

    justafarmer Well-Known Member

    Well all I can say is I'll defend your right to express this view.
     
    2 people like this.
  14. CoinOKC
    Yeehaw

    CoinOKC T R U M P 2 0 2 4

    You may be a little confused. I'm saying that a right to believe IS a right.

    Again, I think you're confused. A right CANNOT be taken away; our rights our inherent in all of us. But, a government's guarantee of that right CAN be taken away.

    You'll get no argument from me.

    Let me correct you. No one is elevating his belief to a right. But, he does have the right to believe. Now, supporting that right does not equate to supporting his belief.
     
    2 people like this.
  15. CoinOKC
    Yeehaw

    CoinOKC T R U M P 2 0 2 4

    I will second that.
     
  16. JoeNation
    No Mood

    JoeNation The ReichWing Abuser

    Do you see my views as ignorant or damaging?
     
  17. justafarmer

    justafarmer Well-Known Member

    Even the most knowledgable and enlightened of us are 99.9% ignorant.
     
  18. JoeNation
    No Mood

    JoeNation The ReichWing Abuser

    That doesn't really address the question. Do you believe that my views as laid out in this thread are ignorant or damaging?
     
  19. JoeNation
    No Mood

    JoeNation The ReichWing Abuser

    Anyway, beliefs, rights, opinions, ignorance, whatever you want to get behind is your business. I've said what I believe. No one has to defend my right to say it.

    And speaking of the latest Right wing hero....

    It is my opinion that while his ignorance is based in his racist views, he probably is just speaking his mind without the code words the Right wing usually uses. He doesn't have the same kind of filter the racists on the Right wing have nor the polished dog whistle language they routinely use. They can't run fast enough away from this guy only, and I repeat only, because he is saying what they believe without the cover of the coded language they use even though they believe everything he is saying.

    Cliven Bundy: If People Think I'm Racist, Blame MLK Jr.

    by Shadee Ashtari
    Posted: 04/25/2014 10:48 am




    Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy claimed during a Friday interview on CNN that he didn’t understand the bipartisan outrage over his recent comments suggesting the "Negro people" were “better off” as slaves, and blamed the perception that he's racist on Martin Luther King Jr. for not finishing “his job.”
    "I took this boot off so I wouldn’t put my foot in my mouth with the boot on," Bundy said. "Let me see if I can say something. Maybe I sinned, and maybe I need to ask forgiveness, and maybe I don't know what I actually said, but when you talk about prejudice, we're talking about not being able to exercise what we think.
    “If I say 'Negro' or 'black boy' or 'slave,' if those people cannot take those kind of words and not be [offended], then Martin Luther King hasn't got his job done yet," he added. "We need to get over this prejudice stuff."
    Bundy has allowed his cattle to illegally graze on government-owned land without paying fees since 1993. He has been championed as an anti-government crusader in recent weeks by some conservatives, including Sens. Dean Heller (R-Nev.) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.), though they've distanced themselves from him in the wake of his racist remarks.
     
  20. David

    David Proud Enemy of Hillary

    YES! Ignorant, for sure, but only damaging to any idiot dumb enough to pay heed.
     

Share This Page