]
Originally posted by: Amused
Originally posted by: eits
Originally posted by: KK
Originally posted by: UglyCasanova
Originally posted by: SampSon
Amused: If you've noticed how everything you're talking about has already been covered nearly verbatim in this thread, you'll realize how utterly useless it is to explain what you're saying to them. They don't care about property rights, or personal rights, or anybody's "rights" but their own. It's an exercise in futility and what it boils down to is these people saying "I don't like smoking and I will go to every measure to make sure it's not around me, except actually being proactive and not being in the presence of smokers.".
You can argue this thread to 15 more pages and you're never in a million years going to get them to agree that you're right and they are wrong on the issue of property rights and infringement of personal rights and the importance of personal responsibility. These people would rather whine and have the govt do something for them rather than them actually putting an ounce of effort into "protecting" themselves.
:thumbsup:
:thumbsup:
you guys can stick those thumbs up your asses if you think public health infringement takes a back seat to private property rights.
WTF is a "public health infringement?" No one is infringing on your rights. You have no rights on someone elses property. If something is happening there that you do not like, your only recourse is to leave. But no... you seek to force private property owners to make you comfortable.
This has been discussed time and time again when someone whines about the lack of freedom of speech on these forums. These forums are PRIVATE PROPERTY and the owner gets to control what is said, and not said.
how many times are you going to repeat THE SAME DAMN THING!?!?!
face the fact that some people do not agree with you and nothing you say is going to change that.
[/quote]
I'm waiting for a valid argument against it. I hoping someone can make one if I challenge these notions.
How many times are people going to repeat the same failed argument made over and over in this thread that I and others have shreded? I note you don't ask that question...[/quote]
you've been given valid arguments. you're just too much of a fvckface to accept them... instead, you use backwards logic and sophism to try and make a counterpoint (which doesn't work... it only makes people realize that you're very ineffective and don't know how to argue/debate a point logically).[/quote]
Um, no... I haven't seen a valid argument for robbing private property owners of their rights to appease people who are NOT obligated to visit their property.
And please, point out a single fallacious argument I have made if you're going to be accusing me of it. I HAVE debated every point logically and effectively. All I have seen in return is purely selfish appeals to conformism and the stealing of private property rights to appease selfish whims.
Again, this is a simple case of selfish people not caring who gets screwed so long as it's not their own bull getting gored.
Until then, I'll be waiting...[/quote]
we've tried to explain. you just don't understand. you won't understand. it's fruitless to repeat it.
but knock yourself out repeating yourself if that's how you get your jollies.
just try to control your temper and maybe realize your view isn't the only view out there.
[/quote]
The problem is, I understand all too well. Your arguments were flawed and, to be blunt, ignorant. You even had to be educated on the difference between private, and public property. You assumed you had a "right" to enter a business when no such right exists. You assumed you had a "right" to demand private property owners conform their property to cater to your whims against their will.
Hell, nearly your entire argument was based on false assumptions.[/quote]
repost
Facebook
Twitter