ScottSA

Go away please.

Doesn't this guy sound like a poster we had on here before. http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showuser=3251 Sorry, not me. Can you please stalk someone else?

Yeah, don't worry about it. I'm sorry I haven't make your fallacy understandable too. I see you like to use animal analogies, so perhaps we can start by using Sesame street puppets like Big Bird tomorrow...I'm not sure the groundwork is yet laid in your mind for moving on to entire words, much less logic.

I'm waiting for you to explain how and why the "international bankers" are killing all the bees.

This is a ridiculous argument. Is it the best you can do? Perhaps only a few hundred "extremists" were chanting it? 75%? 92%?

I have half a mind to report you for slander and perpetual strawmanism, but I'm sure figleaf will do it for me. Besides, you obviously suffer from an inability to think straight, and it's equally obvious that you have some sort of fag stalking thing going on. But I'm not really interested, thanks anyway.

Why do you insist on following me around to disrupt threads? Some sort of fag hate love thing you have going?

Care to describe some of these alleged BBs, or are you just up to slander again? Care to describe someone who has "put me in my place"?

Try to hide your glee at the suffering...lest someone think your need to be right is mall you care about.

Well Polly, I'm not really playing this game. It's pointless. You'll go on believing whatever it is you believe until you get into third year university, when you'll discover that big plots usually turn into big misinterpretations or paradigmatical overlays, then you'll do a 360 switch and set about debunking everything you formerly believed, without ever realizing that it debunks itself by ommission. That's cool, but I'm not really here to aid you in your journey of self discovery...I'm just here to throw in the odd kick during your intellectual mugging.

If there was a shred of truth in what you posted I would comment. What you mean is that if you could cross swords with me without suffering a shredding, you would. You can't, so don't.

What were those freedoms we once had, that you speak of? Besides none? Well, I'll keep it simple for you. The freedom to not wear helmets on motorcycyles. It is unjust of the state to require that we take care of ourselves, UNLESS, the state (or more precisely the taxpayer) is footing the bill for our health. The freedom to smoke without being taxed. The state has no right to require that we pay excess tax on tobacco, unless it is footing the bill for our health. These and a lot of other choices are choices we gave up the moral right to when we accepted the state as our health protector.

Hey Polly? You're an idiot.

Perhaps Archives Canada archives Canadian laws and not United States laws? The War Revenue Act of 1917 was an American law.

That's the crux of the matter. Civil society, quite aside from the political regime, has always, since Ur, traded obligation for obligation. In fuedal times, the true stystem (as opposed to 20th century renditions of it) was service for noblesse oblige, the latter term taken very seriously indeed by the Lord. In Asiatic despotism, the same thing applied. Today we trade the potentiality of anarchistic freedom for rule of law and public goods, for the simple reason that Rousseau's stag hunt makes more sense than hunting hares alone. If someone chooses to live as an alleged Freeman and withdraw from all obligation to the state, then one must also logically withdraw all demands upon the state. That includes the use of public goods of all kinds, including protection under the law. If we escew the state and simply ignore it, it WILL in fact wither away, but then there is absolutely nothing to stop the strong from despoiling the weak. There will be nothing but a state of nature, and from all historical indications it will be closer to Hobbe's state of nature than Locke's. It's always amusing, for example, to watch the Indians claim they need to continue living in a state of nature as it was before it became sullied by the white man, then drive away in a car on a highway to their electrically maintained woodframe houses. Indians are not dumb, that's for sure. What this guy is really doing is doing a postmodern deconstructive rehashing of the cynicism of Diogenes as it existed in it's original form. At least Diogenes had the courtesy to recognize that if he chose to live outside of civil society he could claim none of it's fruits. Yet he did, by default, claim all sorts of its fruits, simply by living in Athens itself. And that's the cunundrum. If this guy had stood in a forest, naked except for whatever skins he had managed to take from animals he killed, ridden with various deseases he couldn't cure through modern medicine, and unversed in language, we could take him as credible, but he is practising the hieght of hypocrisy by utilizing all that civil society has to offer, including civil protection, education (although apparently not much of it), and a videocamera, while claiming he owes no obligation. It's rather a silly and transparent exercize.

This was the dream of the Libs last election too. Didn't happen then and won't happen now. If the soft center vote swings to the Cons enough to give Harper a majority, it presupposes a number of things in the Ontario and Quebec urban areas, all of which make the Dipper vote irrelevant. That's the joy of not having proportional representation in the HoC.

Of course. You cleverly baited a trap to catch someone admitting that the CPC's election platform has always been to scrap the gun registry. How clever to singlehandedly expose Harper's nefarious secret strategy of publically announcing something and actually meaning it! You are a sleuth excellent!

I take it you missed Wilbur's post?

So instead of laughing Woody, why don't you teach us all about non-polluting energy? Go ahead, this is your chance to show everyone to be "flat wrong".

Ok, of the 1000s of pilots out there, all allegedly clamouring that 911 was "impossible", these folks have found 20 after 6 years of looking. But they're still growing!

It's called suspending critical thought and then innoculating oneself from counterfacts. That's why Polly never actually reads the links provided and doggedly repeats the same argument that was just rebutted. Polly has no interest in knowing the truth; his sole interest is in preached the Word of Plot.

Oh dear, now she's become Princess Di and Mother Theresa...

I would like you to brush up on your english...the superfluous use of apostrophes in every sentence gets a bit tiring on the eyes. I even sent you a corrective link, but you ignored it. Anyway, whether anyone can see that I'm ethnocentric or not, it doesn't change the fact that this thread is about bringing burning ghat customs to the west, not about what they do in India. I pointed out what they do in India because it was relevant to the thread, since Hindus want to institute in on the Thames. Your lilly white observations about my belief system are not relevant to the thread. In case you haven't noticed, I'm fairly well immune to these silly accusations of "racism", "homophobia" and now "ethnocentrism". Of course I'm ethnocentric...it comes from years of living in the third world and seeing for myself what the world is about...and then choosing the western system of living as worthy of being "centric" about. We live in the best social system in the world, and I'm proud of it. It's truly a shame more people can't or won't open their eyes to what the rest of the world actually is...it's not a result of "poverty", "ignorance" or any of the other leftist shibboleths...those are a consequence of atrocious social models.

Hey woody, guess who Harriman was? This is another Woody "oops" moment, brought to you by Morons Against Bush...