26 Jul 2018, 2:35 pm
Spiderpig wrote:
Twilightprincess wrote:
The New Oxford American Dictionary defines liberty as “the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views.”
It wouldn’t have to be just political or governmental authority.
It wouldn’t have to be just political or governmental authority.
Oh, yeah, what can you expect from a dictionary made by academia and its leftist agenda?
If you’d prefer, you could substitute “freedom” for “liberty” in this instance.
Last edited by TwilightPrincess on 26 Jul 2018, 2:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,795
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
26 Jul 2018, 2:40 pm
26 Jul 2018, 2:44 pm
26 Jul 2018, 3:23 pm
26 Jul 2018, 3:34 pm
Spiderpig wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Even at the expense of the liberty of others?
If there's no government, nothing curtails anyone's liberty, by definition.
Kraichgauer wrote:
Because of prejudice, the "other" isn't just hated,
People should have a right to be prejudiced in any way they want and to hate anyone they want.
Kraichgauer wrote:
but is relegated to second class citizenship,
A useless abstraction if you don't specify what that means in practical terms.
Kraichgauer wrote:
denied employment,
Nobody should be forced to hire anyone, so denying employment is not curtailing the would-be employee's liberty; forcing the employer to hire them is curtailing the employer's liberty.
Kraichgauer wrote:
told where they can't live,
How exactly? Nobody should be forced to rent or sell a home to anyone, so the same as above applies.
Kraichgauer wrote:
and have even been in danger of their lives.
Again, how exactly? Nobody should be forced to help anyone else.
Kraichgauer wrote:
It's government intervention that has extended liberty to oppressed groups.
That's a contradiction in terms—liberty is the absence of government intervention.
Kraichgauer wrote:
quoteNo amount of liberty justifies sh*tting on someone else because of who they are.
On the contrary, sh*****g on whomever you want—and facing the consequences—is liberty.
Government intervention does impose certain limits but that usually enables more people to have greater freedom.
Prejudice is just not okay.
26 Jul 2018, 4:44 pm
Twilightprincess wrote:
Spiderpig wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Even at the expense of the liberty of others?
If there's no government, nothing curtails anyone's liberty, by definition.
Kraichgauer wrote:
Because of prejudice, the "other" isn't just hated,
People should have a right to be prejudiced in any way they want and to hate anyone they want.
Kraichgauer wrote:
but is relegated to second class citizenship,
A useless abstraction if you don't specify what that means in practical terms.
Kraichgauer wrote:
denied employment,
Nobody should be forced to hire anyone, so denying employment is not curtailing the would-be employee's liberty; forcing the employer to hire them is curtailing the employer's liberty.
Kraichgauer wrote:
told where they can't live,
How exactly? Nobody should be forced to rent or sell a home to anyone, so the same as above applies.
Kraichgauer wrote:
and have even been in danger of their lives.
Again, how exactly? Nobody should be forced to help anyone else.
Kraichgauer wrote:
It's government intervention that has extended liberty to oppressed groups.
That's a contradiction in terms—liberty is the absence of government intervention.
Kraichgauer wrote:
quoteNo amount of liberty justifies sh*tting on someone else because of who they are.
On the contrary, sh*****g on whomever you want—and facing the consequences—is liberty.
Government intervention does impose certain limits but that usually enables more people to have greater freedom.
Prejudice is just not okay.
That's just wrong. Every single decision you make about anything involves some form of prejudice. If prejudice is wrong, you would be unable to make a single decision about anything.
26 Jul 2018, 4:53 pm
Bataar wrote:
Twilightprincess wrote:
Spiderpig wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Even at the expense of the liberty of others?
If there's no government, nothing curtails anyone's liberty, by definition.
Kraichgauer wrote:
Because of prejudice, the "other" isn't just hated,
People should have a right to be prejudiced in any way they want and to hate anyone they want.
Kraichgauer wrote:
but is relegated to second class citizenship,
A useless abstraction if you don't specify what that means in practical terms.
Kraichgauer wrote:
denied employment,
Nobody should be forced to hire anyone, so denying employment is not curtailing the would-be employee's liberty; forcing the employer to hire them is curtailing the employer's liberty.
Kraichgauer wrote:
told where they can't live,
How exactly? Nobody should be forced to rent or sell a home to anyone, so the same as above applies.
Kraichgauer wrote:
and have even been in danger of their lives.
Again, how exactly? Nobody should be forced to help anyone else.
Kraichgauer wrote:
It's government intervention that has extended liberty to oppressed groups.
That's a contradiction in terms—liberty is the absence of government intervention.
Kraichgauer wrote:
quoteNo amount of liberty justifies sh*tting on someone else because of who they are.
On the contrary, sh*****g on whomever you want—and facing the consequences—is liberty.
Government intervention does impose certain limits but that usually enables more people to have greater freedom.
Prejudice is just not okay.
That's just wrong. Every single decision you make about anything involves some form of prejudice. If prejudice is wrong, you would be unable to make a single decision about anything.
I try to make informed decisions based on research and logic.
By prejudice, I was really referring to racial prejudice, sexism, etc.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,795
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
26 Jul 2018, 5:33 pm
Twilightprincess wrote:
Spiderpig wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Even at the expense of the liberty of others?
If there's no government, nothing curtails anyone's liberty, by definition.
Kraichgauer wrote:
Because of prejudice, the "other" isn't just hated,
People should have a right to be prejudiced in any way they want and to hate anyone they want.
Kraichgauer wrote:
but is relegated to second class citizenship,
A useless abstraction if you don't specify what that means in practical terms.
Kraichgauer wrote:
denied employment,
Nobody should be forced to hire anyone, so denying employment is not curtailing the would-be employee's liberty; forcing the employer to hire them is curtailing the employer's liberty.
Kraichgauer wrote:
told where they can't live,
How exactly? Nobody should be forced to rent or sell a home to anyone, so the same as above applies.
Kraichgauer wrote:
and have even been in danger of their lives.
Again, how exactly? Nobody should be forced to help anyone else.
Kraichgauer wrote:
It's government intervention that has extended liberty to oppressed groups.
That's a contradiction in terms—liberty is the absence of government intervention.
Kraichgauer wrote:
quoteNo amount of liberty justifies sh*tting on someone else because of who they are.
On the contrary, sh*****g on whomever you want—and facing the consequences—is liberty.
Government intervention does impose certain limits but that usually enables more people to have greater freedom.
Prejudice is just not okay.
Thank you.
You saved me time and effort in refuting the arachnid ham, and you were a lot nicer than I probably would have been.
27 Jul 2018, 8:37 am
27 Jul 2018, 9:20 am
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| What do people expect people of a certain age to look like? |
29 Feb 2024, 9:19 pm |
| Does it seem like autistic people are more likely to not.... |
20 Feb 2024, 11:53 pm |
| Any linux people can help me? |
16 Feb 2024, 10:05 am |
| Do They Think People Are Thick? |
21 Feb 2024, 5:40 pm |
