What are some things you are against?

[toant103]

I'm against

People
Boss
Co-worker.
People

 

[DWW]

anti-smokers
environmentalists
anti-copyright and intellectual property people and groups
people who put others at risk on the road due to careless speeding and weaving in and out of lanes
stupid lawsuits mostly to do with suing someone
gay marriage
vegetarians
women liberationists
the always annoying paul begala from CNN's Crossfire
people who say they are vegetarians because they won't eat beef or pork but they will still eat chicken (is it a plant? NO!)
blaming alcohol for letting the real you come out. "Really I'm not a slvt, I just did two guys cause I was drunk" she said. It was two guys plus adventures with a third guy believe it or not. I wasn't supposed to tell her boyfriend (my friend)...yeah ... right :roll:

 

[Eavan]

no particular order

1. people who abuse their children
2. rabid vegetarians/vegans unless due to medical condition (have 2 cousins with PKU, can't eat meat)
3. rabid religious fundamentalists
4. rabid dogs
5. Nickleback
6. no manners
7. sorority hos
8. reality shows
9. using anger as an excuse to do stupid things
10. dubya
11. kerry
12. being sick

 

[loup garou]

Originally posted by: Eavan
no particular order

1. people who abuse their children
2. rabid vegetarians/vegans unless due to medical condition (have 2 cousins with PKU, can't eat meat)
3. rabid religious fundamentalists
4. rabid dogs
5. Nickleback
6. no manners
7. sorority hos
8. reality shows
9. using anger as an excuse to do stupid things
10. dubya
11. kerry
12. being sick

:thumbsup:
I like this guy.

 

[nageov3t]

I'm pretty anti-handguns. if you own a rifle for hunting, that's cool, but I don't see the need for the average citizen to keep a glock under their bed for "protection".

 

[waggy]

man all this talk of venison is getting me to want some. to bad it is not hunting season. sniff.

I hunt deer, rabbit and will take a squirrel if i can. a good rabbit stew is awesome. I dint eat the squirrel but my grandmother does. She eats almost all of it also. I tried it once but didn't like the meat myself.

Also as others have stated hunting keeps the heard thinned out so they do not starve, it keeps disease down and also it keeps them from damaging crops and property. Not to mention its really yummy.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
PNAC
neo-cons
ashcroft
cheney
capitalists (not the concept, but those who treat it as a religion and money the god)
prejudism
injustice
egocentricism
zealotism
ignorance
businesses as entities
heat
social conformity
mandatory attendance
government/social interferance in private matters
abuse
exploitation
environmental harm
ebonics
cruelty
lawyers
politicians
sports integrated with public schools on public money
job training over education
abortion as birth control
corporate welfare
needless welfare
any education, medicine, or basic needs industry being 'for profit'
outsourcing
open immigration
political correctness

there's a start anyway.

Added:
smoking
drug use (don't think it should be illegal, it just makes you a dumba$$ if you do it)
cheating (on a game)
cheating (on a lover/spouse)
hunting for sport
gossip
reality tv
paparazzi
people who infringe on the rights of others (especially in self-defense issues)
fashion
non-microbrew american beer

*thanks to all who posted them to give me the ideas

You have so many contradictions in your list, I don't even know where to start.

well, here's one

Business as Entities and Government Interference in Private Matters are completely contradictory.

I disagree. Government ALLOWING businesses the rights of an individual is interferance. Businesses aren't alive, and thereby have no rights. The people that own/run/work the businesses have rights, but the business itself does not truly exist.

By that reasoning they are not contradictory. Furthermore, your warrant is that a business is a private matter. However, I was speaking of private matters like the bedroom, beliefs, etc.

I see no contradictions, but feel free to point out any others so I can continue to explain them and discredit you.

If business (we're talking corporation) can not truly exist, then how can they be sued? How can they enter into contracts? How can they be awarded contracts? How can they be taxed?

And Privacy is privacy. What a private business, and to a limited extent public companies, do should be the sole discretion of that business.

I don't think they should be able to be sued, nor taxed, nor enter binding contracts. I believe it's one of the wretched failings of the last 100 years. Companies aren't real, they do not live, and therefore are not entitled to rights. The desire of persons to form corporations is largely based on an attempt to remove personal responsibility from those seeking to earn money. I think somebody, rather 1 person or a group, are TOTALLY responsible 100% for everything that happens, and all contracts, taxes, etc should fall to them. I don't believe in rights for ANYTHING not living.

I agree to some extent. While I don't think someone should have the right to walk in off the street and review your research material, that's because it really belongs to the person doing the research or the person who paid for it...not because it belongs to the company. And saying business have the right to privacy increases the likelihood that they will exploit their workers, the public, and the environment for financial gain...and that can not be allowed.

I realize you don't agree, and I don't care in the least. Be a selfish, ego-centric greedy bastard all you want, I prefer a higher standard.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: loki8481
I'm pretty anti-handguns. if you own a rifle for hunting, that's cool, but I don't see the need for the average citizen to keep a glock under their bed for "protection".

Why the hell would you keep it under the bed....it would take to long to get to.

 

[falias]

Originally posted by: Tinkerhell
I'm against:

1. Wearing fur
2. Hunting
3. People who shove their religion down your throat
4.
5. Cheating
6. Cruelty to animals
7. People who smoke around their children (in the house, in the car)

I have to think of some more.

You should be more open minded about these things...

 

[cKGunslinger]

1) Hypocrisy

That's about it. People should just be themselves.

If you are a half-retarded a**hole, then be one. Don't pretend to a nice person. If you preach down to others, you best be damn sure you are doing everything *you* can to live a perfect life.

I don't claim to know exactly WWJD, but I'm pretty sure that he wouldn't be driving around in a huge SUV, gossiping on the phone about who-is-sleeping-with-who, while weaving in and out of traffic at 95mph on the freeway with 7 kids in the backseat, while condeming all those around him with some smarta**, holier-than-thou bumper sticker.

 

[DougK62]

I can't believe people are against hunting. You'd have to be pretty ignorant to think that.

 

[3chordcharlie]

5. Nickleback

 

[BurnItDwn]

hmm ...

I am against
---------------
1. Anything faith based with little or no logical reasoning to back it up (religion, superstiton, & various other make believe things)
2. vegans
3. being extremely wastefull
4. people that mess with or take things that are not theirs
5. trends in general (music trends, fashion trends, etc)
6. Mosquitos and other pests
7. peta
8. speed limits

and much much more .....

 

[Brutuskend]

What are some things you are against?

Boobies.














Every chance I get!

 

[KarenMarie]

political correctness
Animal testing
seatbelt laws
people who bitch about my smoking in my own house
people who say "Unquote"

 

[yukichigai]

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
seatbelt laws

Care to explain how this one doesn't automatically nominate you for the Future Darwin Awards?

 

[yukichigai]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

5. Nickleback

Oh man, no kidding. Worst band in radio. At least since Creed broke up.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: yukichigai

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
seatbelt laws

Care to explain how this one doesn't automatically nominate you for the Future Darwin Awards?

Wearing your seatbelt is a good idea, but so is eating a good breakfast and exercising. How come we don't have laws for that, or for the millions of other things that are "good for us?"

I guess I fall into the whole "libetarian" category. As long as what I'm doing doesn't infringe on the inherent rights of others, leave me the fsck alone! If I wanna ride my motorcycle without a helmet, let me! If I wanna sit in my basement, growing and smoking weed all day, let me! Why do other people feel the need to dictate what I do to/with myself? There are so much more important things these busy-bodies could be doing with their time.

Explain to me why alcohol is legal and weed isn't?

ps: just a note, I've never even seen a real joint, much less smoked anything. But that doesn't change the fact than laws against such things are moronic.

 

[yukichigai]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger
Wearing you seatbelt is a good idea, but so is eating a good breakfast and exercising. How come we don't have laws for that, or for the millions of other things that are "good for us?"

I guess I fall into the whole "libetarian" category. As long as what I'm doing doesn't infringe on the inherent rights of others, leave me the fsck alone! If I wanna ride my motorcycle without a helmet, let me! If I wanna sit in my basement, growing and smoking weed all day, let me! Why do other people feel the need to dictate what I do to and with myself? There are so much more important things these busy-bodies could be doing with their time.

Except for not wearing a motorcycle helmet, none of the things you mentioned will kill you.

Seatbelt laws aren't on the books only for the welfare of the driver. There's the passenger as well. It's one thing when your idiotic driving gets you killed, but when someone else's idiotic driving gets you killed that's just not cool.

More than anything I think it's so the automobile industry doesn't stop putting seatbelts in cars. If there were no national seatbelt laws then automakers would argue there's no pressing need to put them in cars, do a bunch of biased studies and use it to overturn whatever ruling requires them to put seatbelts in cars. Then nobody could wear a seatbelt unless they got some aftermarket kit.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands
PNAC
neo-cons
ashcroft
cheney
capitalists (not the concept, but those who treat it as a religion and money the god)
prejudism
injustice
egocentricism
zealotism
ignorance
businesses as entities
heat
social conformity
mandatory attendance
government/social interferance in private matters
abuse
exploitation
environmental harm
ebonics
cruelty
lawyers
politicians
sports integrated with public schools on public money
job training over education
abortion as birth control
corporate welfare
needless welfare
any education, medicine, or basic needs industry being 'for profit'
outsourcing
open immigration
political correctness

there's a start anyway.

Added:
smoking
drug use (don't think it should be illegal, it just makes you a dumba$$ if you do it)
cheating (on a game)
cheating (on a lover/spouse)
hunting for sport
gossip
reality tv
paparazzi
people who infringe on the rights of others (especially in self-defense issues)
fashion
non-microbrew american beer

*thanks to all who posted them to give me the ideas

You have so many contradictions in your list, I don't even know where to start.

well, here's one

Business as Entities and Government Interference in Private Matters are completely contradictory.

I disagree. Government ALLOWING businesses the rights of an individual is interferance. Businesses aren't alive, and thereby have no rights. The people that own/run/work the businesses have rights, but the business itself does not truly exist.

By that reasoning they are not contradictory. Furthermore, your warrant is that a business is a private matter. However, I was speaking of private matters like the bedroom, beliefs, etc.

I see no contradictions, but feel free to point out any others so I can continue to explain them and discredit you.

If business (we're talking corporation) can not truly exist, then how can they be sued? How can they enter into contracts? How can they be awarded contracts? How can they be taxed?

And Privacy is privacy. What a private business, and to a limited extent public companies, do should be the sole discretion of that business.

I realize you don't agree, and I don't care in the least. Be a selfish, ego-centric greedy bastard all you want, I prefer a higher standard.

And that statement contradicts your dislikes of cruelty, ignorance and prejudism.

You prefer a higher standard, yet you stoop to name-calling in a debate. How adult of you.

 

[So]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: yukichigai

Originally posted by: KarenMarie
seatbelt laws

Care to explain how this one doesn't automatically nominate you for the Future Darwin Awards?

Wearing your seatbelt is a good idea, but so is eating a good breakfast and exercising. How come we don't have laws for that, or for the millions of other things that are "good for us?"

I guess I fall into the whole "libetarian" category. As long as what I'm doing doesn't infringe on the inherent rights of others, leave me the fsck alone! If I wanna ride my motorcycle without a helmet, let me! If I wanna sit in my basement, growing and smoking weed all day, let me! Why do other people feel the need to dictate what I do to/with myself? There are so much more important things these busy-bodies could be doing with their time.

Explain to me why alcohol is legal and weed isn't?

ps: just a note, I've never even seen a real joint, much less smoked anything. But that doesn't change the fact than laws against such things are moronic.

Agreed. Nobody is against seatbelts, and I think few people would be against laws requiring car manufacturers to include seatblets (or at least offer them) but the law that says you have to do something, I object to on principle. (And my car never moves if anyone [esp myself] in my car is not wearing a seatbelt)

 

[z0mb13]

religious nazis..

dumb annoying coworkers (people)

 

[Gurck]

Originally posted by: DougK62
I can't believe people are against hunting. You'd have to be pretty ignorant to think that.

No kidding... "OMG but bambi is so furry and cute!!11!1 LOL".. yeah, Bambi and his 8 billion siblings :| Without wolves (which would be in the US but for mankind) the deer population is ridiculous. Now I don't personally want to hunt (has nothing to do with not killing any furry cutesy animals, but rather not wanting to sit on my ass without a pc in front of me for hours at a time ), but people who do should have nothing stopping them. I have a well-used deer path on the side of my house and it's just nuts how many there are. I'm lucky to have never hit one while driving, although I did blow the master brake cylinder in an old car a few years back (it was on its last legs anyway) braking HARD to avoid hitting one. Most of my neighbors & friends have hit one or at least have a family member who has.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: yukichigai

Except for not wearing a motorcycle helmet, none of the things you mentioned will kill you.

Seatbelt laws aren't on the books only for the welfare of the driver. There's the passenger as well. It's one thing when your idiotic driving gets you killed, but when someone else's idiotic driving gets you killed that's just not cool.

More than anything I think it's so the automobile industry doesn't stop putting seatbelts in cars. If there were no national seatbelt laws then automakers would argue there's no pressing need to put them in cars, do a bunch of biased studies and use it to overturn whatever ruling requires them to put seatbelts in cars. Then nobody could wear a seatbelt unless they got some aftermarket kit.

I don't get your whole passenger/driver thing. If the passenger *wants* to wear a seatbelt, that's fine, but why should our goverment mandate it? And impose fines on those who *choose* not to? Now, laws mandating that *children* must be restrained are ok, since a child does not have the capacity to make that choice themselves, but once you turn 18, who cares? Also, it'd be fine to even require city bus driver and such to wear them for their passenger's safety, but not private citizens.

Now as far as worrying about manufacturers not including seatbelts, that's just absurd. If any of them try that, they'll just lose business to those that do offer them. A *lot* of people wear seatbelts for their own personal benefit and would continue to do so, even without a law. I would never buy a car that didn't offer goverment-regulated-and-tested seatbelts. The free market would take care of that real quick. Or the gov can just change to law to saw that manufacturs *have* to include them, but people do't *have* to wear them. Why not?

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: loki8481
I'm pretty anti-handguns. if you own a rifle for hunting, that's cool, but I don't see the need for the average citizen to keep a glock under their bed for "protection".

It's not a need, it's a right.

Has nothing to do with hunting or self-defense against criminals. It has to do with keeping the government in check. Now you may say that in today's world, we don't need to think about revolting against our government. But the reason we have the right to bear arms is to keep that option open if it is ever needed.

Maybe you've heard of a little thing called the United States Constitution.