| Posted by | Message |
ChineseBandit58 
LSU Fan
piney woods
Member since Aug 2005
7406 posts
 Online
| re: Post of the Year (Posted on 12/31/12 at 11:56 am to Rex)
quote:
The very purpose of our government, as even acknowledged by our own Constitution, is to promote the general welfare. Having said that, your gross generalization about the mind of "progressives" is no different from the minds of everyone else: you think roads and bridges are socially advantageous so you want them built by government, you think armies are socially protective so you want them maintained by government, . . . .
Your own view of government playing a necessary role is no different from mine; the difference is only in the details.
examples of promoting the general welfare as constitutionally provided. The purpose of roads and bridges to the general welfare is self-evident so promotion, maintenance, and inspections of them is naturally beneficial to the public as a whole.
But according to your reasoning relative to gun control for instance, the Amish should be on sound ground to have the government ban them. Not useful for the Amish.
As for maintaining a national defense, that is pretty self-evident as a national interest. But you should argue on behalf of the pacifists, who want noting to do with 'war' or the capacity to engage in in. Not beneficial to them.
quote:
you see abortions as socially destructive so you want them banned by government, you see guns as socially necessary so you want them revered by government, you see religion as beneficial so you want it coddled by government, etc., etc., etc.
Noting in the constitution says it is ok to yank a half born child out of a mother's birth canal by crushing its head, or - if it should survive that ordeal, to purposely set it aside to die by exposure and neglect - just because the mother didn't want to be inconvenienced by its presence. That is the ground you are staking out as your own - to be defended to the death of the last fetus.
Arms are protected specifically by the constitution, unlike abortion=on-demand. There is nothing about 'revering' guns in following constitutional dictates. It is merely an enumerated right.
There is nothing about 'coddling' religion in the constitution - and there is nothing about 'separation of church and state' in the constitution either, although that is a good thing. What is stupid is your belief that our government should be hostile toward religion of the christian variety, while coddling religion of the islamic variety. That is just plain stupid.
Your 'etc. etc. etc.' would be even more lame than what you considered to be your strongest arguments. I'd love to see them in your order of priority.
quote:
constant calls for prohibitions against sexual privacy, free speech, marriage equality, artistic expression, etc., etc.
Ya know - you should publish your own dictionary if you are going to 'speak in tongues.' Every thing you stated here is an abject lie (and I know you eschew lying because you said so) using the normal definitions of the common words you chose.
You certainly would never lie - or misconstrue - or mislead - would you????
Again the etc, etc, must be hum-dingers.
|
| Back to top | |
SlowFlowPro 
Stanford Fan
Equality is a circle, not a =
Member since Jan 2004
263486 posts
| re: Post of the Year (Posted on 12/31/12 at 11:58 am to Rex)
quote:
The very purpose of our government, as even acknowledged by our own Constitution, is to promote the general welfare
through what was a restrictive process with limited powers to promote any policy, let alone that wide of a policy
quote:
Having said that, your gross generalization about the mind of "progressives" is no different from the minds of everyone else: you think roads and bridges are socially advantageous so you want them built by government, you think armies are socially protective so you want them maintained by government, you see abortions as socially destructive so you want them banned by government, you see guns as socially necessary so you want them revered by government, you see religion as beneficial so you want it coddled by government, etc., etc., etc. Your own view of government playing a necessary role is no different from mine; the difference is only in the details.
protecting our rights and a few limited roles is a lot different than promoting social policy
one thing you're ignoring is the expansion of the policies into areas government has no business going. i mean look at the whole era of the new deal and all the vast expansion in government
sure, any non-anarchist believes government has a role, but progressives see that role as infinite, where any time a perceived crisis emerges the solution is through government (even if there is no solution)
quote:
Again, your motivations are no different, thus the constant calls for prohibitions against sexual privacy, free speech, marriage equality, artistic expression, etc., etc.
where do i advocate any of that?
if you think i'm a republican who believes in using government to regulate social behavior that doesn't affect others, you're wrong.
quote:
That's just a false generalization and a ridiculous insult not worthy of discussion.
i'm looking at history and all the horrible consequences of progressive ideology. are you saying it doesn't exist?
quote:
That's a pretty odd statement for a non-"progressive" to make, considering his easy proclivity to hypocritically rail against the dangers of our own government while insisting on its mandates for his preferred policies, as already described,
who are my boogeymen (outside of government), rex?
quote:
Your own motivations are no different. The non-religious "hate" religion as false for its doctrines and its desired policies, just as the religious hate the opposite. In fact, religious expectations of behavior are far more dogmatic and restrictive than are those of the non-religious.
i don't know. they're pretty similar
i'm not a religious person, but i understand its role. it's the same with other similar societal structures
people pick their own churches, most of the time. whether that's anti-religion, environmentalism, anti-business, anti-rich, etc. they all follow similar patterns. i'm not really a part of any such group, as best i can tell
i don't trust authority
quote:
It's a self-evident proposition to state that to do otherwise than accept your own social desires would be insane bipolarism.
i don't push my own social desires on people who don't wish to participate, so it's a bit different
|
| Back to top | |
Turkey_Creek_Tiger
LSU Fan
a Meth lab in Livingston Parish
Member since Dec 2012
1035 posts
| re: Post of the Year (Posted on 12/31/12 at 12:00 pm to Rex)
|
| Back to top | |
Scruffy 
USA Fan
Team Hugo Stiglitz 4 Life
Member since Jul 2011
17690 posts
| re: Post of the Year (Posted on 12/31/12 at 12:02 pm to Rex)
You can't declare your own post to be post of the year. 
|
| Back to top | |
Rex
LSU Fan
Here, there, and nowhere
Member since Sep 2004
47666 posts
| re: Post of the Year (Posted on 12/31/12 at 12:11 pm to Scruffy)
quote:
You can't declare your own post to be post of the year.
Just another example of conservative oppression.
|
| Back to top | |
Bard 
LA-Monroe Fan
BR
Member since Oct 2008
12801 posts
| re: Post of the Year (Posted on 12/31/12 at 12:19 pm to Rex)
Egotism, thy name is Rex.
|
| Back to top | |
Scruffy
USA Fan
Team Hugo Stiglitz 4 Life
Member since Jul 2011
17690 posts
| re: Post of the Year (Posted on 12/31/12 at 12:20 pm to Rex)
quote:
Just another example of conservative oppression.
|
| Back to top | |
Turkey_Creek_Tiger
LSU Fan
a Meth lab in Livingston Parish
Member since Dec 2012
1035 posts
| re: Post of the Year (Posted on 12/31/12 at 1:07 pm to Rex)
quote:
Just another example of conservative oppression
so letting the majority decide who has the post of the year and not being able to vote for yourself is conservative oppression? 
This post was edited on 12/31 at 1:08 pm
|
| Back to top | |
LSURussian
LSU Fan
Baton Rouge
Member since Feb 2005
63211 posts
| re: Post of the Year (Posted on 12/31/12 at 1:28 pm to Rex)
quote:
Dumbass Post of the Year
quote:
Has to be my own
 
|
| Back to top | |
Redacted
[REDACTED]
Member since Jun 2012
271 posts
| re: Post of the Year (Posted on 12/31/12 at 2:51 pm to Rex)
quote:
Worst Poster of the Year
quote:
Rex
Do we need to vote on this? I'm sure it's unanimous.
|
| Back to top | |
constant cough 
New Orleans Saints Fan
Lafayette
Member since Jun 2007
28432 posts
| re: Post of the Year (Posted on 12/31/12 at 3:14 pm to Rex)
quote:
Has to be my own explanation of how it's both unfair and illogical, except to further enrich the rich, to tax capital gains except on new issues at a lower rate than on ordinary income.
Was that the one where you first put on the Maggie Puppet Head and we all made fun of you?
Yeah, that thread was awesome!
|
| Back to top | |
RedShirt
LSU Fan
Rant's foremost authority on LSU
Member since Apr 2005
643 posts
| re: Post of the Year (Posted on 12/31/12 at 3:56 pm to Rex)
I've been reading this board for years. One thing that I've concluded is this: Rex is the worst individual/person imaginable. What a piece of human garbage!
|
| Back to top | |
Jbird 
Iowa Fan
Odramaville with EthanL
Member since Oct 2012
4967 posts
| re: Post of the Year (Posted on 12/31/12 at 9:35 pm to Rex)
quote:
Sorry, but your post is just typical pablum around here: full of false stereotypes, generalizations, red herrings, strawmen, and non sequiturs.
Such a deep well thought out reply I changed my mind it is cool you suck Odrams crank! 
|
| Back to top | |
