Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discrimination?

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

haymarket said:

Your problem is with the US Constitution and the powers it gives government that you simply pretend to not support but in practice do indeed support.

Click to expand...

No. My problem is not with the constitution. The constitution contains no language that denies the American people the ability to control access to their own property. My problem is with you and your ilk who wish to impose such limits on your fellow Americans.

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

haymarket said:

Your problem is with the US Constitution and the powers it gives government that you simply pretend to not support but in practice do indeed support.

Click to expand...

I don't believe that you've provided a direct example of this assertion. Please do so or a link to the post in which you have already done so.

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Federalist said:

No. My problem is not with the constitution. The constitution contains no language that denies the American people the ability to control access to their own property. My problem is with you and your ilk who wish to impose such limits on your fellow Americans.

Click to expand...

The Constitution authorizes the practice of eminent domain and contains a remedy when it is employed. Your position seems to want 100% absolute and total control of property by the person who has government proof to own it. Sorry - but that is not the way it works in the real USA and never has worked that way.

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

maquiscat said:

I don't believe that you've provided a direct example of this assertion. Please do so or a link to the post in which you have already done so.

Click to expand...

Its right in the Constitution. Amendment 5.

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

haymarket said:

The Constitution authorizes the practice of eminent domain and contains a remedy when it is employed. Your position seems to want 100% absolute and total control of property by the person who has government proof to own it. Sorry - but that is not the way it works in the real USA and never has worked that way.

Click to expand...

I note that you cannot provide any language in the constitution that requires that government force be used to deny the American people the ability to control access to their own property.

So, as I said earlier, my problem is not with the constitution. It is with you and your ilk who wish to take and control the property of your fellow Americans.

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

haymarket said:

Its right in the Constitution. Amendment 5.

Click to expand...

No, I mean where Federalist "...simply pretend(s) to not support but in practice do(es) indeed support."

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Federalist said:

I note that you cannot provide any language in the constitution that requires that government force be used to deny the American people the ability to control access to their own property.

So, as I said earlier, my problem is not with the constitution. It is with you and your ilk who wish to take and control the property of your fellow Americans.

Click to expand...

Amendment V authorizes the taking of private property for public use.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Click to expand...

We danced this dance before and it came down to your silly insistence that the government is not forced ... is not ordered .... is not mandated to exercise eminent domain and thus should not exercise a perfectly legitimate power in the Constitution. It was inane then and it is inane now. You want to harbor such a foolish idea that the government should not exercise a legitimate power given to it in the Constitution which benefits the larger community with hospitals, roads, schools, highways, airports, terminals, clinics, and all manner of government buildings providing services - you are welcome to such delusions. But it is one of the most silly and hollow and pointless arguments I have ever had the misfortune to witness.

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

maquiscat said:

No, I mean where Federalist "...simply pretend(s) to not support but in practice do(es) indeed support."

Click to expand...

He and I have had this discussion many many many times. It is reality that Federalist
1 - says that he is against the practice of eminent domain
2- freely uses the results of eminent domain in his daily life

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

haymarket said:

Amendment V authorizes the taking of private property for public use.

We danced this dance before and it came down to your silly insistence that the government is not forced ... is not ordered .... is not mandated to exercise eminent domain and thus should not exercise a perfectly legitimate power in the Constitution. It was inane then and it is inane now. You want to harbor such a foolish idea that the government should not exercise a legitimate power given to it in the Constitution which benefits the larger community with hospitals, roads, schools, highways, airports, terminals, clinics, and all manner of government buildings providing services - you are welcome to such delusions. But it is one of the most silly and hollow and pointless arguments I have ever had the misfortune to witness.

Click to expand...

Yes, which is why I said that my problem is not with the constitution, since the constitution does not require that any person be denied the ability to control access to his property.

You and your ilk want to use government force to deny the American people the ability to control access to their own property.

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Federalist said:

Yes, which is why I said that my problem is not with the constitution, since the constitution does not require that any person be denied the ability to control access to his property.

You and your ilk want to use government force to deny the American people the ability to control access to their own property.

Click to expand...

It is a silly and inane argument that denies the reality of the world we live in and necessity to NOT allow one stubborn or greedy individual to stop a communities progress or hold them up for a kings ransom - and apparently the Founders knew this and provided accordingly in Amendment language which prevents this.

Of course - it is typical right libertarian extremism to stubbornly insist that the theoretical "rights" of one person count more than the rest of society. And you guys wonder why you cannot even get 1% in a national election? :doh:roll::lamo

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

haymarket said:

It is a silly and inane argument that denies the reality of the world we live in and necessity to NOT allow one stubborn or greedy individual to stop a communities progress or hold them up for a kings ransom - and apparently the Founders knew this and provided accordingly in Amendment language which prevents this.

Click to expand...

Yes, I understand that you condone taking what belongs to others when it furthers your ends. I will continue to argue against such taking, as I oppose the violation of others' body and property.

However, I'm not sure why you have changed the topic to eminent domain. We were discussing the use of government force to prevent your fellow Americans from controlling access to their own property.

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Federalist said:

Yes, which is why I said that my problem is not with the constitution, since the constitution does not require that any person be denied the ability to control access to his property.

Click to expand...

The Constitution allows it so you problem is indeed with the Constitution.

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Federalist said:

Yes, I understand that you condone taking what belongs to others when it furthers your ends. I will continue to argue against such taking, as I oppose the violation of others' body and property.

However, I'm not sure why you have changed the topic to eminent domain. We were discussing the use of government force to prevent your fellow Americans from controlling access to their own property.

Click to expand...

My "ends" have nothing to do with it.

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

haymarket said:

The Constitution allows it so you problem is indeed with the Constitution.

Click to expand...

Nope. My problem is with the enabling legislation Congress opted to pass, not the constitution.

I oppose federal legislation that uses government force to prevent my fellow Americans from controlling access to their own property.

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

US Conservative said:

I freely admit the map isn't the territory-but mother jones? For real?

Click to expand...

And that is why when someone references a strongly right-wing site, I STILL read what it has to say - because what's important isn't who says a thing, but whether that thing is accurate and in proper context.

Remember a couple weeks ago the brouhaha about some supervisor named Linda over at the IRS targeting the Tea Party? The post referenced some right-wing site...so I read it, researched it on other sites, and found out the right-wing site was right, and because of that I must support the continuing investigation.

So...it's not who says a thing - it's whether that thing is accurate and in proper context. Please feel free to criticize what MJ published if you can find flaws in their work.

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Federalist said:

Nope. My problem is with the enabling legislation Congress opted to pass, not the constitution.

I oppose federal legislation that uses government force to prevent my fellow Americans from controlling access to their own property.

Click to expand...

Good for you. You are a man of strong beliefs. Too bad your actions do not match those stated beliefs.

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

haymarket said:

Good for you. You are a man of strong beliefs. Too bad your actions do not match those stated beliefs.

Click to expand...

Exactly. You support the policy of using government force to restrict the ability of your fellow man to control access to his own property. I oppose this policy. I oppose policies that initiate violence against the person or property of my fellow man, since I consider the initiation of violence to be unethical. I take you you consider it justified to use force against your fellow man in order to restrict his ability to control access to his own property. What makes you feel you are justified in doing so?

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

haymarket said:

He and I have had this discussion many many many times. It is reality that Federalist
1 - says that he is against the practice of eminent domain
2- freely uses the results of eminent domain in his daily life

Click to expand...

I ask this of both Haymarket and Federalist: Has Federalist actually admitted that he uses some sort of government (any level) owned property that has been taked under the use of eminent domain? Additionally does he use this facility(s) freely, because he wants to or is it because the specific facility is something that he needs to do under necessary circumstances and thus does not really have a choice. e.g. an MVA office.

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

maquiscat said:

I ask this of both Haymarket and Federalist: Has Federalist actually admitted that he uses some sort of government (any level) owned property that has been taked under the use of eminent domain? Additionally does he use this facility(s) freely, because he wants to or is it because the specific facility is something that he needs to do under necessary circumstances and thus does not really have a choice. e.g. an MVA office.

Click to expand...

Federalist doesn't freely use the results of eminent domain in his daily life. Haymarket, as usual, makes many assumptions, which is why he is mistaken.

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Federalist said:

Federalist doesn't freely use the results of eminent domain in his daily life. Haymarket, as usual, makes many assumptions, which is why he is mistaken.

Click to expand...

I am assuming that you may unknowingly use such facilities. Do you use any such facilities due to no alternative? I am also asking Haymarket to put up or shut up on his assertion

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

maquiscat said:

I am assuming that you may unknowingly use such facilities. Do you use any such facilities due to no alternative?

Click to expand...

No, I don't.

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

maquiscat said:

I ask this of both Haymarket and Federalist: Has Federalist actually admitted that he uses some sort of government (any level) owned property that has been taked under the use of eminent domain? Additionally does he use this facility(s) freely, because he wants to or is it because the specific facility is something that he needs to do under necessary circumstances and thus does not really have a choice. e.g. an MVA office.

Click to expand...

the answer from Federalist

Federalist doesn't freely use the results of eminent domain in his daily life. Haymarket, as usual, makes many assumptions, which is why he is mistaken.

Click to expand...

Are we to believe that Federalist is being held in a imprisoned condition of involuntary servitude and is being forced to drive upon streets, roads and highways built with eminent domain which he uses and benefits from but which he pretends to oppose on principle and is completely and utterly powerless and impotent to do anything else?

Are we to believe that Federalist is being held in a imprisoned condition of involuntary servitude and is being forced to use hospitals and medical care facilities built with eminent domain which he uses and benefits from but which he pretends to oppose on principle and is completely and utterly powerless and impotent to do anything else?

Are we to believe that Federalist is being held in a imprisoned condition of involuntary servitude and is being forced to use airports built with eminent domain which he uses and benefits from but which he pretends to oppose on principle and is completely and utterly powerless and impotent to do anything else?

Are we to believe that Federalist is being held in a imprisoned condition of involuntary servitude and is being forced to use services provided by government employees working in government buildings and facilities built with eminent domain which he uses and benefits from but which he pretends to oppose on principle and is completely and utterly powerless and impotent to do anything else?

Are we to believe that Federalist is being held in a imprisoned condition of involuntary servitude and is being forced to interact with people educated and trained to perform job functions in schools built with eminent domain which he benefits from but which he pretends to oppose on principle and is completely and utterly powerless and impotent to do anything else?

I could go on and on with more examples as to how this individual makes free decisions in his daily life to benefit from eminent domain but yet still gets upon his high horse and pretends to oppose it. Sorry but that simply rings hollow when the words are compared to the actions.

Of course - this brings up the basic contradiction of the right libertarian and exposes the fraud and hypocrisy they live by.

They justify their hypocrisy by wallowing in the justifying delusion that they have no choice and this life has been imposed upon them by the same bad evil government that they have decided is the Great Satan in all things and it is that evil power which mandates them, which forces them, which compels them to say one thing while living another. Just like the abusive husband who looks down upon his battered wife and sobs in regret that "you made be do it" - they attempt to resolve themselves of their own actions and decisions. Just like the rapist who blames the victim for wearing too sexy clothes or coming on to them or teasing them or leading them on and again with "you made me do it". Just like the speeder ticketed by police who blames their actions upon everyone else on the road who forced them to drive faster than they wanted to ... "I was just trying to keep up with everyone else - they made me do it".

Its all a bunch of crap. Its all an attempt by weak people to justify their own actions and their own hypocrisy and their own belief systems which run contrary to their actions.

So somebody else made them do it and they did not do so "freely" or "willingly" or "they did not want to do it".

Gimme a break. If somebody really truly actually and honestly has such strong objection to the everyday actions that one needs to engage to in our American society and sees fit to condemn them and rant and rally against them - its time to crap or get off the pot.

But this is merely one of the basic fatal flaws in the right libertarian - they try to talk the talk but are impotent to walk the walk. And in our society, actions speak much much louder than words.

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

haymarket said:

Are we to believe that Federalist is being held in a imprisoned condition of involuntary servitude and is being forced to drive upon streets, roads and highways built with eminent domain which he uses and benefits from but which he pretends to oppose on principle and is completely and utterly powerless and impotent to do anything else?

Are we to believe that Federalist is being held in a imprisoned condition of involuntary servitude and is being forced to use hospitals and medical care facilities built with eminent domain which he uses and benefits from but which he pretends to oppose on principle and is completely and utterly powerless and impotent to do anything else?

Are we to believe that Federalist is being held in a imprisoned condition of involuntary servitude and is being forced to use airports built with eminent domain which he uses and benefits from but which he pretends to oppose on principle and is completely and utterly powerless and impotent to do anything else?

Are we to believe that Federalist is being held in a imprisoned condition of involuntary servitude and is being forced to use services provided by government employees working in government buildings and facilities built with eminent domain which he uses and benefits from but which he pretends to oppose on principle and is completely and utterly powerless and impotent to do anything else?

Are we to believe that Federalist is being held in a imprisoned condition of involuntary servitude and is being forced to interact with people educated and trained to perform job functions in schools built with eminent domain which he benefits from but which he pretends to oppose on principle and is completely and utterly powerless and impotent to do anything else?

I could go on and on with more examples as to how this individual makes free decisions in his daily life to benefit from eminent domain but yet still gets upon his high horse and pretends to oppose it. Sorry but that simply rings hollow when the words are compared to the actions.

Of course - this brings up the basic contradiction of the right libertarian and exposes the fraud and hypocrisy they live by.

They justify their hypocrisy by wallowing in the justifying delusion that they have no choice and this life has been imposed upon them by the same bad evil government that they have decided is the Great Satan in all things and it is that evil power which mandates them, which forces them, which compels them to say one thing while living another. Just like the abusive husband who looks down upon his battered wife and sobs in regret that "you made be do it" - they attempt to resolve themselves of their own actions and decisions. Just like the rapist who blames the victim for wearing too sexy clothes or coming on to them or teasing them or leading them on and again with "you made me do it". Just like the speeder ticketed by police who blames their actions upon everyone else on the road who forced them to drive faster than they wanted to ... "I was just trying to keep up with everyone else - they made me do it".

Its all a bunch of crap. Its all an attempt by weak people to justify their own actions and their own hypocrisy and their own belief systems which run contrary to their actions.

So somebody else made them do it and they did not do so "freely" or "willingly" or "they did not want to do it".

Gimme a break. If somebody really truly actually and honestly has such strong objection to the everyday actions that one needs to engage to in our American society and sees fit to condemn them and rant and rally against them - its time to crap or get off the pot.

But this is merely one of the basic fatal flaws in the right libertarian - they try to talk the talk but are impotent to walk the walk. And in our society, actions speak much much louder than words.

Click to expand...

As I said, you know nothing about me or my actions. As usual, you are making assumptions, which is why you are wrong.

You want to make it illegal for a property owner to control who has access to his own property. I oppose this policy, since I oppose the initiation of aggression. What do you think gives you (or anyone) the right to threaten the use of force against your neighbor for the "crime" of preventing someone access to his property?

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

Federalist said:

As I said, you know nothing about me or my actions. As usual, you are making assumptions, which is why you are wrong.

Click to expand...

Then feel free to tell me which actions of yours I am incorrectly discussing. Here is your chance to clear it up.

I contend that you use and benefit from streets and roads and highways and airports and terminals and services provided for by government employees working out of government buildings and some of these were built using the power of eminent domain. I contend that you benefit from interactions with other Americans educated or trained in schools built with the power of eminent domain. I contend that you have used medical facilities built with the power of eminent domain.

So here is your chance to clear up what you characterize as me knowing nothing. Come clean and tell us about these "assumptions" and why they are wrong. Tell us how an American can live among us in society, have computer access and not do ANY of those things.

This I gotta hear.

Re: Which Is More Important? The Right to Discriminate, or Freedom from Discriminati

haymarket said:

Then feel free to tell me which actions of yours I am incorrectly discussing. Here is your chance to clear it up.

I contend that you use and benefit from streets and roads and highways and airports and terminals and services provided for by government employees working out of government buildings and some of these were built using the power of eminent domain. I contend that you benefit from interactions with other Americans educated or trained in schools built with the power of eminent domain. I contend that you have used medical facilities built with the power of eminent domain.

So here is your chance to clear up what you characterize as me knowing nothing. Come clean and tell us about these "assumptions" and why they are wrong. Tell us how an American can live among us in society, have computer access and not do ANY of those things.

This I gotta hear.

Click to expand...

Those are interesting assumptions. But, as I'm sure you are aware, in a debate, when one makes accusations, one must then back up those accusations with proof. So put up or shut up, and provide proof.