Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-03-2013, 08:26 PM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
Complete and utter nonsense. Being liberal doesn't mean being open to change, it means to liberate, to make free. Its right in the name. Libertarians are liberal, Dems are much more stiffing, just as is the GOP, they just want to stiffle you on different issues. Your conservative definition is correct, but I would say to conserve liberal ideas is still to conserve, and by definition be a conservative.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-03-2013, 10:27 PM
AW: RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
(01-03-2013 08:26 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Complete and utter nonsense. Being liberal doesn't mean being open to change, it means to liberate, to make free. Its right in the name. Libertarians are liberal, Dems are much more stiffing, just as is the GOP, they just want to stiffle you on different issues. Your conservative definition is correct, but I would say to conserve liberal ideas is still to conserve, and by definition be a conservative.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a conservative someone who wants to conserve the status quo?

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-03-2013, 09:28 AM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
(01-03-2013 08:26 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  Complete and utter nonsense. Being liberal doesn't mean being open to change, it means to liberate, to make free. Its right in the name. Libertarians are liberal, Dems are much more stiffing, just as is the GOP, they just want to stiffle you on different issues. Your conservative definition is correct, but I would say to conserve liberal ideas is still to conserve, and by definition be a conservative.

You can, if you want to, bullshit the definition of a word to benefit your self-interest and personal beliefs-- you can take that one up with the people making dictionaries, history books and providing other information-- but even if you wanted to go with the "liberty", "free" part of the word, I already addressed that, and you would still be wrong.

Only right-wing libertarians box in freedom to mean freedom to do stupid shit within a capitalist system. Just because certain people want freedom from a larger, more efficient social contract, a freedom from people who are moral and more intelligent than them, presenting any opposition to their bullshit, doesn't mean that's the only kind of "liberating" freedom and liberty available.

The latter part was my point. Modern or more modern conservatives, are simply conservative, and shouldn't be compared to liberals of previous times. Liberals take ideas and build upon them, they don't cherry-pick already established ideas, are with them, and then present an opposition to any thing new and progressive.

There are certain people who are right-wing, on economics, and liberal. People who personally support gay marriage, progressive drug laws, regulation, rehabilitation, progressive gun laws, accept evolution and global warming, etc, yet also support the free-markets and capitalism-- those would be Republicans labeled as RINO today and a good deal of Democrats, also. Those people would also be libertarian if they were against state authority, and the Libertarian party is actually made of a lot of those types of people. However, there are also people who are against state authority, while personally being against a lot of those types of issues, usually due to religious beliefs, making them conservative libertarians, and that's the basic, general view of the Tea Party.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-03-2013, 09:45 AM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
Truth be told, the words conservative and liberal were chosen because the more applicable terms, fascist and socialist, already had a bad vibe.

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-03-2013, 02:24 PM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
I completely disagree with about everything you just said. What reason could I possibly have to try and change definitions? Ludicrous, rose is but a rose no matter how much it stinks. All Libertarians are liberal, but not all l Liberals are Libertarians. I also hate the use of progressive in politics. It side-steps the debate and smugly self-assures the speaker (or typist) that they are right. Frankly their is very little progressiveness in fucking around the drug laws a bit. You wanna be progressive? Abolish the drug laws, now that's progressive. Also, couldn't disagree more about your definition of RINO, ridiculous. It has absolutely nothing to do with personal views on evolution, and isn't specific to social issues either. RINO stands for Republican In Name Only, it can refer to anyone who is a Republican, but frequently disagrees with or votes differently than their fellow party members. More examples would be Republicans who vote for bigger government or want to give more power to the federal government (NDAA, Patriot Act, Etc.) Republicans who vote for more social programs or spending on such programs (Universal Healthcare, FEMA, etc). Your definition is incomplete, and therefore wrong.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Dark Light's post
02-03-2013, 06:59 PM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
(02-03-2013 02:24 PM)Dark Light Wrote:  I completely disagree with about everything you just said. What reason could I possibly have to try and change definitions? Ludicrous, rose is but a rose no matter how much it stinks. All Libertarians are liberal, but not all l Liberals are Libertarians. I also hate the use of progressive in politics. It side-steps the debate and smugly self-assures the speaker (or typist) that they are right. Frankly their is very little progressiveness in fucking around the drug laws a bit. You wanna be progressive? Abolish the drug laws, now that's progressive. Also, couldn't disagree more about your definition of RINO, ridiculous. It has absolutely nothing to do with personal views on evolution, and isn't specific to social issues either. RINO stands for Republican In Name Only, it can refer to anyone who is a Republican, but frequently disagrees with or votes differently than their fellow party members. More examples would be Republicans who vote for bigger government or want to give more power to the federal government (NDAA, Patriot Act, Etc.) Republicans who vote for more social programs or spending on such programs (Universal Healthcare, FEMA, etc). Your definition is incomplete, and therefore wrong.

Like I said, you can believe whatever bullshit you want.

The RINO, along with some Democrats, Libertarian party, Tea party, were all examples of groups that could contain people who fit within the categories I was bringing up, and I really don't even know what would have made you infer that I was defining and boxing in those people. You can continually insist on ignorance, but I have already given the counter example to "All Libertarians are liberal" (those are completely separable terms, addressing different things). I guess you now have to take that one up with Glenn Beck, as he is a conservative person, with a libertarian ideology toward government, and that goes for a lot of the Tea party and supporters. Not all libertarians are Milton Friedman, for example, and you can't just take the ones you like and disregard others. Also, if a Republican in a conservative district/state came out for gay marriage, supported gun laws, accepted evolution and wanted to address global warming, they would likely be ostracized and/or just lose their jobs. Yes, you can add in other voting histories, but hence "etc.".

Progressive is a word that is basically synonymous with liberal. It does, intentionally, give the indication of moving toward progress, but that really shouldn't bother people, given that it should be already assumed that liberals support ideas that they think will bring progress. Given that you refuse to accept the meaning of the word liberal, it's not like I'd actually expect you to accept the meaning of progressive.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-03-2013, 07:05 PM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
(02-03-2013 09:45 AM)bbeljefe Wrote:  Truth be told, the words conservative and liberal were chosen because the more applicable terms, fascist and socialist, already had a bad vibe.

I'm surprised you went with "fascist" and "socialist", as opposed to murderers and rapists.

The Paradox Of Fools And Wise Men:
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser men so full of doubts.” ― Bertrand Russell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-03-2013, 07:29 PM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
"I'm surprised you went with "fascist" and "socialist", as opposed to murderers and rapists."

Well, I figured that was kinda self evident. Cool

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-03-2013, 08:30 PM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
X, the problem with you equating liberal to mean progress is your definition of liberal is fucked up, and what it takes to satisfy your definition of progress is a pretty low. Some things you may consider progress I would consider regress or stagnation, status quo bullshit.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-03-2013, 08:36 PM
RE: Arguments for the prohibition of drugs
One can be progressing toward a cliff's edge...

The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right names. - Chinese Proverb
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: