Poll: Which Political Philosophy or Party Do you agree with the most?

Which Political Party or Philosophy do you agree with the most?


  • Total voters
    34

deprave

New Member
Strict constitutionalist, people have a hard time remembering the constitution does not apply to you. it is the instructions for the government to follow. it tells the government they have no business nosebaggin around yours. Those are not rules for you to abide by. Even the president knows that.
Very true, I agree, a common misconception, If your really a 'strict constitutionalist' then you know this or at least you should, but thats not always the case. It is at the core of the argument really, the constitution is the law of the land.

So really that would be another argument against Roe V Wade and also an argument against Dreadscott and Slavery because the supreme court determined that people(black people and babies) aren't explicitly given 'rights' in the constitution therefore they don't have these rights. I wish the declaration actually mattered and then none of this type of shit would of ever happened...Slavery would of been abolished a lot sooner, that alone, our country would be a whole lot different just on that, There might of been no civil war or civil rights act needed. Marijuana would probably be legal also and we wouldn't have a police state and a drug war. We would of progressed so much further by now If we followed the declaration and the constitution.
 

sync0s

Well-Known Member
First, it's tough to respond when you reply in the quote of somebody else. Lazy ass, lol

1) Problem with that rule: What if somebody wished they had been aborted? Stick with the 'My rights end, where your rights begin.'
Wished they had been aborted? Sorry not sure I follow, sounds a bit childish like saying "I wish I had never been born!" ? Not really realistic...Don't Follow you at all...


2) Abortion being illegal shouldn't be allowed until one can universally define "life" in regards to people and whether it begins at conception or birth. Problem is, nobody can do that. Until then, I'm 1000% pro-choice. I don't oppose Roe v Wade

So then you'd agree with the courts ruling on Dread Scott also? Its based on this same idea. The idea that black people aren't explicitly mentioned in the Constitution. I think Thomas Jefferson would disagree, its to bad they don't take into account Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"

As for defining life, I think life is clearly defined in a dictionary and so is person-hood. Person hood has been defined as people since the beginning of written history and likely before then. I happen to think that a babie counts as a person. (CALL ME CRAZY! LOL)

Let me ask who is "THEY"...Who should "define" life? And when do "They" plan on doing that if ever? Does life start at 1 year old, 3 months, 12 years old...When exactly should they be allowed to kill people and are they allowed to switch it up if they change their mind?

3) Weird. What about murder? Further more, how is abortion any different when one is raped than when one is not? If you stand on the principle that abortion is murder, yet it's okay if they're pregnant, to me: you're a hypocrite.


Because I also stand against rape...its tough for me to side with this really, sure call my a hypocrite but aren't we all. I think this is a unique situation in many ways.


1) Your silver rule: The Silver Rule is "Do not do unto others what you would not have them do unto you" and that bring us to the golden rule. If one simply wanted/wished that they had been aborted, it would justify them performing abortion under that rule.

2) I didn't say I supported Roe v Wade. I said I'm not against it. Rather, indifferent. I do support the courts overriding those national laws against abortion, because life has not yet been clearly defined. I know that's not their reasoning, but it's the reason I'm not against the decision in the end.

As for the question of who has the right to define: scientific invariable proof, I guess. You're exactly right, though. That's a reason I'm pro choice. The government has no right to define when "human life" begins.



3)
 

deprave

New Member
Yea its a tricky topic really, I mean, Im not a die hard pro-lifer really, I have been pro-choice most of my life. You could say I might still be on the fence but I think the argument for pro-life makes a ton more sense then the argument for pro-choice. I mean just look at the discussion we are having. No offense but your argument I think is pretty weak, although its a good pro-choice argument, couldn't be better lol...but yea thats just it...

With the way it is right now there is the shady big government planned parenthood. DHS and CPS taking kids away that shouldn't be taken away...Its like a big scary big-government scam...and I just don't want to touch that with a 10ft poll not to mention Roe V wade was a very shady case also.

And yea....Im against killing people...I really don't see the justification of 'My body my choice'....Yea its your choice to take a morning after pill...its your choice to fuck without contraception...its your choice not to use birth control or the other wide array of options...its not your choice to kill people..nor is it the choice of a government agency. Hence the Silver Rule.....

Your counter to the silver rule is pretty silly you must admit...Wishing you were aborted? common...what am I supposed to say to that really? I figured you were joking or something. I guess ill take a crack at it and say: I don't think the silver rules applies to suicide because you aren't doing something to others your doing it to yourself.

Also I want to say its not MY silver rule.....It was coined around 10 BC, since then its been the silver rule of many great philosophers from: socrates', hillel, shamai, jesus, mohammad, gandi, plato, mishnah, .....etc.... I don't think I need to continue this list but it can go on and on for quite some time and I would have to look it up because thats just off the top of my head.
 

sync0s

Well-Known Member
Yea its a tricky topic really, I mean, Im not a die hard pro-lifer really, I have been pro-choice most of my life. You could say I might still be on the fence but I think the argument for pro-life makes a ton more sense then the argument for pro-choice. I mean just look at the discussion we are having. No offense but your argument I think is pretty weak, although its a good pro-choice argument, couldn't be better lol...but yea thats just it...

With the way it is right now there is the shady big government planned parenthood. DHS and CPS taking kids away that shouldn't be taken away...Its like a big scary big-government scam...and I just don't want to touch that with a 10ft poll not to mention Roe V wade was a very shady case also.

And yea....Im against killing people...I really don't see the justification of 'My body my choice'....Yea its your choice to take a morning after pill...its your choice to fuck without contraception...its your choice not to use birth control or the other wide array of options...its not your choice to kill people..nor is it the choice of a government agency. Hence the Silver Rule.....

Your counter to the silver rule is pretty silly you must admit...Wishing you were aborted? common...what am I supposed to say to that really? I figured you were joking or something. I guess ill take a crack at it and say: I don't think the silver rules applies to suicide because you aren't doing something to others your doing it to yourself.

Also I want to say its not MY silver rule.....It was coined around 10 BC, since then its been the silver rule of many great philosophers from: socrates', hillel, shamai, jesus, mohammad, gandi, plato, mishnah, .....etc.... I don't think I need to continue this list but it can go on and on for quite some time and I would have to look it up because thats just off the top of my head.

To be fair, I wasn't really arguing for or against either side of the argument. If I were to talk about the biggest reason why I'm pro choice is because I believe evidence points to being a much greater benefit to society by allowing abortions than not, as well as the way I view a fertilized human egg is nothing greater than a fertilized chicken egg.

Much of it is personal opinion, I can always understand any argument for pro-life except the "God" arguments... primarily because I loathe religion.
 

deprave

New Member
Yes Im agnostic as you probably already know, I know your anti-religion, but anyway what would be the God argument really? Like someone savagely yelling 'CAUSE GOD SAYS IT WRONG' or something ignorant like that? I have a hard time seperating what would be the religious argument and what would be the philosophical argument, they all kind of blend togather on this subject especially..

Yea and for shits and giggles...I grew up in strict agnostic household, we only drank dr pepper...lol saw this on south park the other day:

[video=youtube;GVrfqLVI7ZI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVrfqLVI7ZI[/video]
[video=youtube;x0F9b_o3uBk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0F9b_o3uBk[/video]
 

sync0s

Well-Known Member
Yes Im agnostic as you probably already know, I know your anti-religion, but anyway what would be the God argument really? Like someone savagely yelling 'CAUSE GOD SAYS IT WRONG' or something ignorant like that? I have a hard time seperating what would be the religious argument and what would be the philosophical argument, they all kind of blend togather on this subject especially..

Yea and for shits and giggles...I grew up in strict agnostic household, we only drank dr pepper...lol saw this on south park the other day:

[video=youtube;GVrfqLVI7ZI]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVrfqLVI7ZI[/video]
[video=youtube;x0F9b_o3uBk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0F9b_o3uBk[/video]
Ironic sidenote: Matt and Trey (SP Creators) are both Libertarian and Agnostic (Except Matt sometimes hints at full blown Atheism)... yet they always bash their own ways. I love it :)

At any rate, that is the exact argument. Anything to do with the bible or God in the conversation and I discredit it.

A person can argue pro-life by simply saying murder is wrong and argue the fact that a fertilized human cell is a human and it is murder. Simply put, that is a legitimate defense of being pro-life. That side doesn't have to exist only with the religious.

Continuing with south park, I heard rumors that they are kicking around the idea of a libertarian episode (if it hasn't happened already, I haven't watched this season at all).
 

Canna Sylvan

Well-Known Member
That's the reason I'm atheist, not agnostic. People don't try to convert I know there's no god, it's your "faith," like jewish vs islam vs christian. So I tell them, "you have faith there's god and no one will break it, right? I have my faith, the god named No God came to me and said there's no god. You going to argue with the divine wisdom of No God?" They look at me weird, but shut up. But if you say you don't know for sure, every religion automatically turns into a a Jehova's Witness thinking you're open to any religion, you just need to decide.
 

deprave

New Member
The reasons I am agnostic are complex, I will say it has nothing to do with me being afraid to pick a side really. Its because I am into philosophy and the human spirit is a big part of that. I also know theres a lot we can't explain. I feel nobody can possibly know the real truth. Free will is also an impossibility in philosophy.

Also I think that all of the prophets were very wise and had a lot to teach humanity. I could go on and on...but just want to say its NOT because I AM AFRAID that one religion might be right so I am afraid to pick a side or something lmao

I know that the spirit is a very important part to life and to deny that is unhealthy, but really its impossible to deny it completely, even if you think you've blocked it out or that you don't believe in it you still practice it everyday. In this very discussion on this thread you have all been in touch with the human spirit.

Religions are very interesting to me, but you won't find me praying, going to church(I go sometimes If I am invited), joining some kind of cult, giving my life to mohammed or something like that....I simply believe that nobody can possibly know so why would I give my life or something...thats the part I don't believe in...being a "follower" heh
 

unohu69

Well-Known Member
All that is well and good, I would say pretty much the same thing.

now back to government.....

While support the original intent of the constitution, I also am of the mind that it was never properly ratified and we should be operating under the articles of confederation. Because under the articles, in order for a law to be passed there needed to be 100% unanimous agreement, not this 2/3rds majority crap. Far as my research has led me to believe not all the "states" agreed to the passing of the constitution. So in order for the 2/3rds majority to go into effect, they would have had to agree in the first place.

I understand things were a little to hectic under the articles, but it is what it is, there is no perfect form of government.

The original intent of the Constitution was to protect the individuals rights (A Republic), now we let majority rule the singular human (A Democracy), sorry thats just not right. exactly the reason why so many people cant enjoy their favorite herb.....

You want to fix the country and all our rights, DEMAND we return to the original intent of the Constitution and establish our Republic once again. Till then (And I dont believe for one second I'll ever see it), things are going to get worse and worse. Eventually we will be under complete government control, it may take a 100 or a 1000, years but it will happen. The the only thing that can possibly help, is an asteroid destroying everything so we can have a reboot.

In the past It was easy for the people to take up arms against those who abuse the authority and power they think they have, now we are outclassed in firepower, the very thing the 2nd amendment was there to prevent.
 

Canna Sylvan

Well-Known Member
Unohu69,

There's a lot of garbage pertaining to the constitution. Like there should be the titles of nobility amendment. Which doesn't allow titles like judges your honor or police being killed a worse offense than me.

I think the Constitution needs to be rewritten to allow what the founders had no clue about. Also it's not right religion is protected but not having one is not. I shouldn't have to resort to claiming I'm a christian scientist so if I decided to send my kids to public school without vaccines. Also, unlike religion eating ethics aren't protected. A vegetarian can have a practical joke of having a beef burger on your office desk, but putting a BLT on a muslim's or jew's desk is a hate crime!
 

unohu69

Well-Known Member
Thats because people cant handle their feeling getting hurt, liberals like to legislate morals. That cant be done. political correctness is bullshit. I dont give a shit if I offend some one with my opinion or by my actions. Yes there is a common decency line that people probly shouldnt cross, however it does get crossed. And its your right to be able to do so.

As a society we used to shame people who have bad behavior, and they either started acting right or were shunned by the community. Another perfect example of the locals taking care of the problem, not the feds, who have no jurisdiction anyways.

Which also allowed the offender to do his time or move and start over, now bad shit follows you everywhere.

There are really only 4 laws that should be enforced, 1. murder 2. assault 3. theft 4. vandalism

murder for obvious reasons, assault- covers a wide range of things, but basically they fall under this category, theft- again covers things like fraud and what not, and vandalism- nothing is really taken from you, and your not physically harmed but your property is, so compensation should be allowed for.

And thats just for the people really, the government should be subject to those, and so much more.

the titles of nobility was put in there to keep the elected official loyal, you cannot swear an oath to one office while being loyal to another. And yes that applies to lawyers also. Our founders were not stupid men. They allowed for changes to the laws, its just corruption ruined our country way before our time.
One of them (I cant remember who at this moment, knew 10yrs after the signing that the political machine was useless and already establishing laws they had fought so hard to prevent the american people from dealing with.

I know there is a bunch of conspiracy stuff linked in with the Constitution, Like anything, some is absolutely correct and some is garbage. You gotta do some research and find out for yourself, they dont teach this stuff in school for a reason, and thats fine if you can find evidence that they are wrong then show it.

TWELVE TRUTHS ABOUT LEGISLATION
1) Any law the electorate sees as being open to being perverted from its original intent will be perverted in a manner that exceeds the manner of perversion seen at the time.
2) Any law that is so difficult to pass it requires the citizens be assured it will not be a stepping stone to worse laws will in fact be a stepping stone to worse laws.
3) Any law that requires the citizens be assured the law does not mean what the citizens fear, means exactly what the citizens fear.
4) Any law passed in a good cause will be interpreted to apply to causes against the wishes of the people.
5) Any law enacted to help any one group will be applied to harm people not in that group.
6) Everything the government says will never happen will happen.
7) What the government says it could not foresee, the government has planned for.
8) When there is a budget shortfall to cover non-essential government services the citizens will be given the choice between higher taxes or the loss of essential government services.
9) Should the citizens mount a successful effort to stop a piece of legislation the same legislation will be passed under a different name.
10) All deprivations of freedom and choice will be increased rather than reversed.
11) Any government that has to build safeguards into a law so that it will not be abused is providing guidelines for abusing the law without violating it.
12) Any legislator up for re-election will vote against a bad law if and only if there are enough other votes to pass it.



pulled from: http://freedomkeys.com/vigil.htm

tons of good quotes there, and they were all said for a reason....
 

deprave

New Member
Libertarians always win. As illustrated by this poll....lol :)

And now...For Another Left Libertarian Video...The first half of - Lifting The Vail documentary released this year. Very good documentary, one of the best I have seen in months:

[video=youtube;PnE-jKah7b8]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnE-jKah7b8[/video]
[video=youtube;coCP5bpIHLA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=coCP5bpIHLA&feature=related[/video]
[video=youtube;J5EaCtoq3J0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J5EaCtoq3J0&feature=related[/video]
[video=youtube;lWSg78_lNsE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWSg78_lNsE&feature=related[/video]

and now some libertarian comedy:

[video=youtube;eR3KwODDzeY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eR3KwODDzeY&feature=related[/video]
 

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
And what Makes you think A nazi Lover SKinhead would Save a drowning Minority?
Probably the one who threw him in the water to begin with

So again I respectfully ask that you shove a large Vegetable of your Choice Up your Racist ass
But Not an eggplant though
Eggplant in Italian is a slur on blacks
Unless you Like that sort of thing
Wow, you couldn't have come off as more of an idiot if you had tried. I've never done it before, but tempted as hell to just ignore your worthless ass.
 

deprave

New Member
dukeanthony said:
Eggplant in Italian is a slur on blacks
Unless you Like that sort of thing
Sounds like your "into that sorta thing", I lived with Italians for about 3 years and never heard that.
 

dukeanthony

New Member
Sounds like your "into that sorta thing", I lived with Italians for about 3 years and never heard that.
Melanjohni
Its Italian for Eggplant
it is also the slur for blacks
Usally just said as melanjons

I just looked it up
Im giving you the sicilian pronunciation
the Italian one is Melanzana
 

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Any kind of Government that does not rely on individual voluntary consent and participation, must logically rely upon on INvoluntary consent and participation.

As far as I know all of the "options" the U.S. public is "offered" are simply opposite sides of the same sharp instrument. Wrestling for the gun in the room and being part of the group that gets to make others do your bidding is another description of politics.

Carry on.
 

Timmahh

Well-Known Member
you missed an option. NONE> as in, Im too intelligent to follow any one of the above ideologies above with blind faith. they are all segragist in nature.
 

FilthyFizzle

Active Member
Not sure but I guess Independent.. Pro gun, anti gay, limited government, and I believe in a strong military for the homeland.. Anti bailout. Why did Harley Davidson receive stimulus money? Let em go under so another entrepreneur can rise up.

If you cant keep your money right you shouldn't have a second chance. Nobody bails me out when I cant pay my bills on time and I don't expect anybody to... Unlike the Occupiers (;
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Not sure but I guess Independent.. Pro gun, anti gay, limited government, and I believe in a strong military for the homeland.. Anti bailout. Why did Harley Davidson receive stimulus money? Let em go under so another entrepreneur can rise up.

If you cant keep your money right you shouldn't have a second chance. Nobody bails me out when I cant pay my bills on time and I don't expect anybody to... Unlike the Occupiers (;
how can you be "anti-gay"? that would be like being "anti-rainfall" or "anti-mountains".

i think what you mean to say is that you are opposed to equality for a certain segment of the population.

how very american of you.
 
Top