Anti government in the politics section

[Rob Roy]

I already asked.

I hope you aren't just trying to evade my question.

 

[Rob Roy]

I don't consent to being asked that question.

Fair enough. I needed a minute to go get some dry panties anyway. I took them off your mom, but they were kind of moist.

 

[HAF2]

I hope you aren't just trying to evade my question.

I hope you're not trying to evade mine.

 

[TacoMac]

Are you attempting to say that a person should put their hands in somebodies else pocket WITHOUT the others persons consent ?

Unfortunately, that's necessary in many cases. Seat belts for instance. People are, by and large, absolutely stupid to the point of lunacy. You can tell them 1000 times that wearing a seat belt can save their life.

They refuse to do it.

You can show them pictures, statistics, and all that jazz about how many fatalities would have never happened if the people had simply buckled up.

They still wont do it.

So then you make it a law. You have to. Why? Because the death rate in simple accidents hits levels beyond the pale, driving up insurance rates, accident response costs, court costs, investigative costs and everything else in between.

You know what? Some people STILL wont buckle up.

But those who do now because of that law have dropped the fatality rate in HUGE chunks. Countless thousands of lives saved, money saved, hardship saved by passing a simple law because people are, sorry to say, idiots.

A man I admire greatly, Mr. George Washington, once said, "You can not legislate morality". He of course was absolutely correct. But you can legislate common sense. In fact, you have to.

 

[HAF2]

Unfortunately, that's necessary in many cases. Seat belts for instance. People are, by and large, absolutely stupid to the point of lunacy. You can tell them 1000 times that wearing a seat belt can save their life.

They refuse to do it.

You can show them pictures, statistics, and all that jazz about how many fatalities would have never happened if the people had simply buckled up.

They still wont do it.

So then you make it a law. You have to. Why? Because the death rate in simple accidents hits levels beyond the pale, driving up insurance rates, accident response costs, court costs, investigative costs and everything else in between.

You know what? Some people STILL wont buckle up.

But those who do now because of that law have dropped the fatality rate in HUGE chunks. Countless thousands of lives saved, money saved, hardship saved by passing a simple law because people are, sorry to say, idiots.

A man I admire greatly, Mr. George Washington, once said, "You can not legislate morality". He of course was absolutely correct. But you can legislate common sense. In fact, you have to.

 

[SneekyNinja]

Unfortunately, that's necessary in many cases. Seat belts for instance. People are, by and large, absolutely stupid to the point of lunacy. You can tell them 1000 times that wearing a seat belt can save their life.

They refuse to do it.

You can show them pictures, statistics, and all that jazz about how many fatalities would have never happened if the people had simply buckled up.

They still wont do it.

So then you make it a law. You have to. Why? Because the death rate in simple accidents hits levels beyond the pale, driving up insurance rates, accident response costs, court costs, investigative costs and everything else in between.

You know what? Some people STILL wont buckle up.

But those who do now because of that law have dropped the fatality rate in HUGE chunks. Countless thousands of lives saved, money saved, hardship saved by passing a simple law because people are, sorry to say, idiots.

A man I admire greatly, Mr. George Washington, once said, "You can not legislate morality". He of course was absolutely correct. But you can legislate common sense. In fact, you have to.

They've all got "that sorta thing only happens to someone else" syndrome.

 

[UncleBuck]

Democrats are the big government party.

indeed.

we want to set up a deportation force to get rid of 11 million people, have guards at every bathroom checking the birth gender of everyone who enters, an agency to monitor every pregnancy, a massively expanded military, and a militia in charge of checking your government issued ID before we let you vote.

LULZ

the parties switched sides........and theres no evidence for that.

how the south voted:

1880: democrats
1884: democrats
1888: democrats
1892: democrats
1896: democrats
1900: democrats
1904: democrats
1908: democrats
1912: democrats
1916: democrats
1920: democrats
1924: democrats
1928: democrats
1932: democrats
1936: democrats
1940: democrats
1944: democrats
1948: democrats
1952: democrats
1956: democrats
1960: democrats
1964: republican
1968: racial segregation
1972: republican
1976: republican
1980: republican
1984: republican
1988: republican
1992: republican
1996: republican
2000: republican
2004: republican
2008: republican
2012: republican
2016: republican

no switch though.

LULZ

You charge that I am not into equal rights is laughable

you said civil rights were "not a good idea" because you would just "hate 'em more now".

but you are totally into equal rights.

LULZ

 

[UncleBuck]

I hope you aren't just trying to evade my question.

the fucking irony is palpable.

 

[HAF2]

the fucking irony is palpable.

Oh no, he's coming right back to answer my question. Any second now.

 

[dandyrandy]

It does? How so?

Joke

 

[Rob Roy]

the fucking irony is palpable.

Palpable = so intense as to SEEM almost tangible.

So, Poopy Pants, can you delegate a right you don't have?

 

[Rob Roy]

I hope you're not trying to evade mine.

Probably not, but you seem reluctant to tell me what it is .

 

[Rob Roy]

Oh no, he's coming right back to answer my question. Any second now.

View attachment 3904790

I'm sorry I left without your permission. I'll try not to let it happen again. So, what would you like answered ?

 

[Rob Roy]

Unfortunately, that's necessary in many cases. Seat belts for instance. People are, by and large, absolutely stupid to the point of lunacy. You can tell them 1000 times that wearing a seat belt can save their life.

They refuse to do it.

You can show them pictures, statistics, and all that jazz about how many fatalities would have never happened if the people had simply buckled up.

They still wont do it.

So then you make it a law. You have to. Why? Because the death rate in simple accidents hits levels beyond the pale, driving up insurance rates, accident response costs, court costs, investigative costs and everything else in between.

You know what? Some people STILL wont buckle up.

But those who do now because of that law have dropped the fatality rate in HUGE chunks. Countless thousands of lives saved, money saved, hardship saved by passing a simple law because people are, sorry to say, idiots.

A man I admire greatly, Mr. George Washington, once said, "You can not legislate morality". He of course was absolutely correct. But you can legislate common sense. In fact, you have to.

So, based on your "logic" all those deaths caused by government could be prevented if we got rid of government ?

 

[HAF2]

Probably not, but you seem reluctant to tell me what it is .

Third times the charm:
Question for you: why do you feel it is ok for a person to discriminate against someone based on personal biases?

I'm sorry I left without your permission. I'll try not to let it happen again. So, what would you like answered ?

 

[Rob Roy]

Third times the charm:
Question for you: why do you feel it is ok for a person to discriminate against someone based on personal biases?


View attachment 3904923

To do otherwise would remove the right OF an individual to choose their associations and would sanction the use of offense force, by the person who insists on the association. I think human interactions should arise from peaceful, voluntary and consensual means, don't you?

 

[Big_Lou]

Palpable = so intense as to SEEM almost tangible.

So, Poopy Pants, can you delegate a right you don't have?

Probably not, but you seem reluctant to tell me what it is .

I'm sorry I left without your permission. I'll try not to let it happen again. So, what would you like answered ?

So, based on your "logic" all those deaths caused by government could be prevented if we got rid of government ?

To do otherwise would remove the right OF an individual to choose their associations and would sanction the use of offense force, by the person who insists on the association. I think human interactions should arise from peaceful, voluntary and consensual means, don't you?

 

[Rob Roy]

Third times the charm:
Question for you: why do you feel it is ok for a person to discriminate against someone based on personal biases?


View attachment 3904923

 

[dandyrandy]

Unfortunately, that's necessary in many cases. Seat belts for instance. People are, by and large, absolutely stupid to the point of lunacy. You can tell them 1000 times that wearing a seat belt can save their life.

They refuse to do it.

You can show them pictures, statistics, and all that jazz about how many fatalities would have never happened if the people had simply buckled up.

They still wont do it.

So then you make it a law. You have to. Why? Because the death rate in simple accidents hits levels beyond the pale, driving up insurance rates, accident response costs, court costs, investigative costs and everything else in between.

You know what? Some people STILL wont buckle up.

But those who do now because of that law have dropped the fatality rate in HUGE chunks. Countless thousands of lives saved, money saved, hardship saved by passing a simple law because people are, sorry to say, idiots.

A man I admire greatly, Mr. George Washington, once said, "You can not legislate morality". He of course was absolutely correct. But you can legislate common sense. In fact, you have to.

And that helps lower insurance for all. I've found the more people have to lose the more they tend to care. Not money but better life choices are the reason some have more money. Not all. People with money tend to have better hygiene than winos. Some just make better choices. It's best for those that don't make good choices to gently nudge them in the direction to help lower our insurance is a good thing.

 

[HAF2]

To do otherwise would remove the right OF an individual to choose their associations and would sanction the use of offense force, by the person who insists on the association. I think human interactions should arise from peaceful, voluntary and consensual means, don't you?

I agree with peaceful interactions. I do not agree that we get to choose who those interactions are with unless we personally segregate ourselves from persons we don't want to interact with.
You can be a douche and have a sign on your lawn that says "this type of person only is welcome". But when you open a business to the public you are waiving that right because your customer base is all of society.
Is that answered enough for your liking?