MACKER Posted March 17, 2012 Report Posted March 17, 2012 (edited) Except of course that being allowed to have your "tongue to speak", whether or not you "support human rights and free speech" is, in fact, part of supporting human rights and free speech. Well people deserve the society they want to be reflected in themselves. As a supporter of human rights and free speech, you should support the rights of others who disagree with human rights and free speech to freely express their opinions. I'd sooner kill them. It makes things easier to get rid of people who are obstructing a free society. God made us, we die, getting rid of the complications just makes society easier for everyone else. If people are convicted of their beleifs they should move to a society that represents their values. I can't see how people should oppose human rights or freedom of expression. They shouldn't be in a democratic society if they don't support democracy. Sorry no, if it was my choices it would be they leave or die. Resource waste for scum does not benefit us. I'm not going to go out and kill people unlawfully but as a baseline of philosophy, I think we need to recognize we are in a dire global crisis that is only getting worse, we can't screw around no more. Ultimately it is next to impossible to beleive that the Social Party and their values would ever be pushed above the NDP, CPC, and LIBERALS, OR EVEN GREEN OR BLOC, but supporting beliefs and understanding that saving 10 lives is worth killing one monster over, I have no moral qualms. That is the problem with most advocates of "social justice" and "equality". They don't truly support "free speech and human rights". They are aspects of social justice. Instead, they want the government to force people to behave in the way they think conforms with their idea of human rights (see human rights tribunals), I don't thin there should need to be a tribunal, I believe in courts, and all these extra special courts are just a way of delegitimizing the process - we just need one level of courts, and a justice system that upholds principled law, and natural justice. We need to insure our laws also conform to that. These are not difficult concepts to recognize but we need good judges and transparent laws. and everyone is free to speak so long as their speech conforms with the ideas of "social justice". But not otherwise. Free speech should only be limited by working contrary to the good of society or attacks against individuals so as to damage society or to degrade another individuals liberty. Things like spreading false information needs to be stopped. Those who do not support values of freedom are a cancer and must be eradicated. Edited March 17, 2012 by MACKER Quote
Bonam Posted March 17, 2012 Report Posted March 17, 2012 (edited) So you want to kill everyone who doesn't have the same worldview as you. "They are a cancer and must be eradicated". And you complain about our government being fascist Edited March 17, 2012 by Bonam Quote
MACKER Posted March 17, 2012 Report Posted March 17, 2012 (edited) So you want to kill everyone who doesn't have the same worldview as you. "They are a cancer and must be eradicated". And you complain about our government being fascist No, I just suggest those who do not support the principle values of society such as freedom and equality, if they do not leave. Likewise I support crushing peoples skulls with a sledgehammer if they intentionally commit crimes like unsolicited murder, sober aggravated rape, and unnecessitated intentional maiming, on a hypothetical basis of course. The no brainer issues should be obvious to any mature rational and good human. The small issues of micromanagement arn't worth killing people over, only the fundamental issues, as they usually arn't life and death. Actually social aims to give people the freedom of micromanagement of their own lives instead of the government taking 25-70% of their economic assets in fees and taxes imposed on them for daily living. Edited March 17, 2012 by MACKER Quote
Guest Manny Posted March 17, 2012 Report Posted March 17, 2012 Sounds kind of like a "reverse Taliban". Be Liberal, or die. Quote
WWWTT Posted March 17, 2012 Report Posted March 17, 2012 They are also for removal of the public debt, removal of income taxes, and giving the people their economic say back into how their money is spent. This is a contradicting statement! If people do not pay income taxes then how can they have a say about other peoples money? WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
Michael Hardner Posted March 17, 2012 Report Posted March 17, 2012 Likewise I support crushing peoples skulls with a sledgehammer if they intentionally commit crimes like unsolicited murder, sober aggravated rape, and unnecessitated intentional maiming, on a hypothetical basis of course. What is 'solicited murder' ? Why does drunk rape get different treatment than 'sober aggravated rape' ? The no brainer issues should be obvious to any mature rational and good human. The sledgehammer option... not exactly a "no brainer". Even you must admit that most people would give this idea a *little* thought ? Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
j44 Posted March 17, 2012 Report Posted March 17, 2012 What? HAHAHA. This thread made my day. and it is idiotic. Quote
Argus Posted March 17, 2012 Report Posted March 17, 2012 Social Justice is about insuring that people get treated fairly. What is fair? I think fair is in the eyes of the beholder. To some 'fair' is everyone being responsible for his own upkeep. To others, 'fair' means taking money away from the successful and giving it to the unsuccessful, without regard to the reasons why one is successful and the other is not. I believe in equality of opportunity, not equality of results. No one who doesn't support human rights and free speech should have a tongue to speak. Was that meant to be ironic? It just comes off as dumb. And as with 'fair' terms like 'human rights' and 'free speech' seem to be flexibly defined depending on ones ideological views. We must liberate society with Social Justice, egalitarinism, and support of the fundamental human rights Canada turned away from in 2001. To fail to do so will only further entrench the totalitarian police state we are subject to today. I don't know how old you are, but I'm going to presume you are painfully young, and know nothing, or very nearly nothing about the world. Certainly you have no idea what a 'police state' is. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted March 17, 2012 Report Posted March 17, 2012 I'd sooner kill them. It makes things easier to get rid of people who are obstructing a free society. Are you Pol Pot's illegitimate son by any chance? You clearly don't believe in human rights or free speech, despite claiming otherwise. Since you oppose human rights, that means you believe someone ought to be kill you, right? Those who do not support values of freedom are a cancer and must be eradicated. Well, that would be you. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Tilter Posted March 17, 2012 Report Posted March 17, 2012 Well, Why they are not doing a Leader election just as the NDP ?? Read my lips---- or print----- the CPC have the leader that about 50-^0 % of Canadians prefer over the non-leaders of the leaderless parties, why have a leader election when none is necessary. The BQ have the right idea--- ignore the fact that their party is dead and continue along as if they hadn't bee decimated a year ago. Quote
cybercoma Posted March 17, 2012 Report Posted March 17, 2012 Read my lips---- or print----- the CPC have the leader that about 50-^0 % of Canadians prefer over the non-leaders of the leaderless parties, why have a leader election when none is necessary. The BQ have the right idea--- ignore the fact that their party is dead and continue along as if they hadn't bee decimated a year ago. This is some of the worst spinning I have ever read on this site. Quote
Tilter Posted March 17, 2012 Report Posted March 17, 2012 This is some of the worst spinning I have ever read on this site. or so Quote
Liberator. Posted March 20, 2012 Author Report Posted March 20, 2012 This is a bot, right? There can't be an actual person behind this account. Its posts are incomprehensible. Hide your gender,you will duped more people. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.