RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women

RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

WhiteRae -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/20/2011 5:49:14 PM)
I don't know why you think it benefits you but you only give to it because it benefits you. That is the point I'm trying to make. Tax deduction maybe? I don't know how those work so I might be totally wrong about that.

lazarus1983 -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/20/2011 5:50:51 PM)
Not as simple as you'd think. I had to hold your hand twice and give you directions to find specific posts. Let's just assume I might need the same help.

lazarus1983 -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/20/2011 5:58:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhiteRae I don't know why you think it benefits you but you only give to it because it benefits you. That is the point I'm trying to make. Tax deduction maybe? I don't know how those work so I might be totally wrong about that. Haha, I don't know how the tax break thing works either, so don't worry about it. In any case, I give because I've seen the organization at work, and I believe in their mission. Having an organization like that benefits our society. And what benefits our society can benefit me. Have I used it? No. Does that mean I'll never have a need for it? No. So I give to them, because it benefits me to do so.

Aylee -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/20/2011 6:05:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lazarus1983 Well in that case explain to me, using examples taken from these posts, how I've lost, what I've lost, and what the argument is about, in your opinion? I think the argument is about the fact that he thinks that people are incapable of generosity toward other humans without it being forced. Which is really sad.

lazarus1983 -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/20/2011 6:20:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhiteRae I don't know why you think it benefits you but you only give to it because it benefits you. That is the point I'm trying to make. Tax deduction maybe? I don't know how those work so I might be totally wrong about that. A lot of what I'm saying probably doesn't make sense, and that's because I'm trying to condense objectivism as much as I can into little message board posts. :/

EternalHoH -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/20/2011 8:02:42 PM)
There are people who dislike war, but they don't have any personal veto power when their tax dollars are spent on some useless high-tech weaponry program. They cannot dictate that their tax dollars go exclusively to children's health programs and not some military tank or stealth bomber program. The fallacy argument here is some people apparently feel they have unique veto power over how their tax dollars are spent. Such expectations are the product of hubris combined with mental illness.

TreasureKY -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/20/2011 8:17:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk Not what this is about at all. Is about whether you are willing to help a person in need or would you rather hide behind your personal belief in "self determination". Its a cop out. A nice thing to tell yourself that it isn't your problem. That if you just keep driving the person will be passed and you can go onto your nice suburb and have a latte at starbucks That is not what this is about, at all. It is about having a voice is one's own contributions to society. Do I believe in government charity? Not particularly, but I do realize there are good reasons for it to exist. What irks me to no ends is to see people (like some here in this thread) persist in demonizing anyone who doesn't agree with them, and by doing so try to negate their right to have a say in how tax money is spent. Don't like the fundamentalist Christians? Fine and dandy. Detest the tree-hugger crowd? Cool. Hate the right-wingers? Peachy. Loathe the bleeding heart liberals? Okie dokie. But try to suppress them and keep them from exercising their right to equal representation? It's people like me you'll be fighting in the end. Just sayin what is there. you want to hide behind god and country and capitalism on all other issues but when it comes to helping out your fellow countrymen you are like many others on these threads you say "no, thanks" and move on. Its cool. you believe and act how you want to but save me from yours and firm's moral superiority on these threads..makes me want to vomit Way to completely ignore the point of my post... yet utterly demonstrate it at the same time. Congratulations! If that is over your head, I suggest you actually read and try to understand what I wrote.

TreasureKY -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/20/2011 8:47:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EternalHoH There are people who dislike war, but they don't have any personal veto power when their tax dollars are spent on some useless high-tech weaponry program. They cannot dictate that their tax dollars go exclusively to children's health programs and not some military tank or stealth bomber program. The fallacy argument here is some people apparently feel they have unique veto power over how their tax dollars are spent. Its hubris combined with mental illness. Who here has said they want "personal veto power" over where tax dollars are spent? Who here has said that there should be no charity? Who here has said that only bad things happen to people who deserve it? Who here has said that there is no inherent responsibility in belonging to a civilized society? You and others here are helping to demonstrate the very behavior I find both abhorrent and scary. You are judging and demonizing those who don't agree with your position. Those who don't feel as you must be evil, selfish and hateful, or mentally ill. In marginalizing the people who dare to offer countering viewpoints, you build a platform upon which those and others can be denied consideration and representation. And people wonder why it's becoming harder to reach compromise. Go gather together a disparate group of people, shout them down and call them all a bunch of evil, sick fucks, then see how willing they are to work with you. [8\|]

tweakabelle -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/20/2011 9:06:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EternalHoH There are people who dislike war, but they don't have any personal veto power when their tax dollars are spent on some useless high-tech weaponry program. They cannot dictate that their tax dollars go exclusively to children's health programs and not some military tank or stealth bomber program. The fallacy argument here is some people apparently feel they have unique veto power over how their tax dollars are spent. Such expectations are the product of hubris combined with mental illness. Given the number of times this fallacy surfaces in one form or another might your diagnosis benefit by specifying some element of obsession too?

DomYngBlk -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/21/2011 6:30:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY quote: ORIGINAL: DomYngBlk Not what this is about at all. Is about whether you are willing to help a person in need or would you rather hide behind your personal belief in "self determination". Its a cop out. A nice thing to tell yourself that it isn't your problem. That if you just keep driving the person will be passed and you can go onto your nice suburb and have a latte at starbucks That is not what this is about, at all. It is about having a voice is one's own contributions to society. Do I believe in government charity? Not particularly, but I do realize there are good reasons for it to exist. What irks me to no ends is to see people (like some here in this thread) persist in demonizing anyone who doesn't agree with them, and by doing so try to negate their right to have a say in how tax money is spent. Don't like the fundamentalist Christians? Fine and dandy. Detest the tree-hugger crowd? Cool. Hate the right-wingers? Peachy. Loathe the bleeding heart liberals? Okie dokie. But try to suppress them and keep them from exercising their right to equal representation? It's people like me you'll be fighting in the end. Just sayin what is there. you want to hide behind god and country and capitalism on all other issues but when it comes to helping out your fellow countrymen you are like many others on these threads you say "no, thanks" and move on. Its cool. you believe and act how you want to but save me from yours and firm's moral superiority on these threads..makes me want to vomit Way to completely ignore the point of my post... yet utterly demonstrate it at the same time. Congratulations! If that is over your head, I suggest you actually read and try to understand what I wrote. lol Of course, absolutely I ignored the whole thing cause you want to obfuscate what you actually mean. And, of course, you'll come back and say that I can't actually understand what you are saying cause I am not capable of such high powered thought.....you and firm are twins...lol

truckinslave -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/21/2011 6:32:29 AM)
I propose taking them away. There are plenty of neglect/endangerment laws; we just need to enforce them. I propose making it relatively easy to adopt such abused children. I propose giving people who are trying to get their neglected children back "bonus points" for voluntary sterilization.

truckinslave -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/21/2011 6:34:35 AM)
Not I, LL. I just don't want to have money taken from me at gunpoint used to raise the little bastards.

mnottertail -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/21/2011 6:41:47 AM)
who points the gun, interior secretary?

truckinslave -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/21/2011 6:48:59 AM)
quote: The American education system is over burdened in students to teachers, class rooms are too large for anyone to get the one on one help that many need to succeed in class. Nonsense. Average class size is 23 in high school: go here

truckinslave -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/21/2011 6:54:52 AM)
Have you perchance read Mark twain on the subject? I forget the name(s) of the essay(s), but 45 years ago I thought he was tremendous on the subject. And hilarious. You make the same point, exactly..... It was true then, and it's treu now.

truckinslave -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/21/2011 6:57:02 AM)
Atlas Shrugged should be on the big screen this year, with Angelina Jolie as Dagny Taggart (sic?). Two-part movie. It will be interesting to see if it has a political impact.

truckinslave -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/21/2011 6:58:39 AM)
The IRS, genius.

mnottertail -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/21/2011 7:04:09 AM)
OIC genius, and of course you have pictures with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one of the IRS taking your money at gunpoint.

Moonhead -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/21/2011 7:07:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave Atlas Shrugged should be on the big screen this year, with Angelina Jolie as Dagny Taggart (sic?). Two-part movie. It will be interesting to see if it has a political impact. Probably not, but it's bound to inspire a few shitty rip offs, which is about as much influence as Rand's book had.

Moonhead -> RE: Birth Control for Horses, Not for Women (2/21/2011 7:08:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TreasureKY You are judging and demonizing those who don't agree with your position. And you're not?

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 [5] 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875