Assuming that democracy really is 51% against 49%, what gives the 51% the right to force their opinion on the 49%?
Didn't someone important in American history tell us that democracy was 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner?
Words of Wisdom from this Retired Marine Colonel
- Thread starter Sukerkin
- Start date
Assuming that democracy really is 51% against 49%, what gives the 51% the right to force their opinion on the 49%?
Didn't someone important in American history tell us that democracy was 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner?
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
So change it or move. Find your 51% and set the rules how you want. You dont get to just say I dont like it so Im not listening. Thats what my 4 year old does.
Tgace
Grandmaster
My opinion? Seriously?
I don't enforce my "opinon"...I enforce the laws enacted through the representatives of the people.
Screw your wingnut down a little tighter.
Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2
Oh right, the same Constitution that the government you serve violates all of the time? It's ironic that you even bring it up.
Btw, when did I sign the Constitution? Didn't a few oligarchs just up and force this on a whole bunch of people? Like my native ancestors?
Look, I'm just a human who got plopped out on a particular plot of land where the people have all kinds of strange beliefs...including the belief that some humans are better than others and that they can force their will on peaceful people with threats of pain, death, and imprisonment.
If I found my 51% and convinced them that I was right about something, what inherit quality about that group of people makes them better than the 49% they want to rule over?
You show your agreement with all the laws you enforce through your actions. Even if your mouth says something different, your actions prove otherwise. So, yes, you enforce your real opinion with a gun. If all humans are equal, why do you have that power and others do not?
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
I guess cause I passed the background check
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
.......nevermind
Last edited:
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
Nevermind there is no need to continue this nonsense
Let me finish this argument then.
Me - What gives you the right, yadda yadda yadda?
You - people believe I have the right.
Me - you realize this is irrational, just like another religion?
You - so what.
Me - don't you have a problem with enforcing an irrational hierarchy on people?
You - No.
Me - is it reasonable to think that all humans are equal?
You - obviously not. Most people need someone like me to control them.
Me - how do you know that.
You - I don't know it, but I believe it and so do most others.
Me - does reason and evidence mean anything to you?
You - sometimes, but not now. The momentum of people's belief will get you killed if you don't follow it. Humanity exist in a state of jumped up barbarism and you either learn to deal with it or you get to deal with people like me.
Me - so if no one else cares whether or not power is reasonable, you can either live by the sword or die by it.
You - yes.
Me - that sucks.
You - it's what it is. Accept it or don't, you choose. Do what they tell you or else....this...you point to your gun.
OP
OP
I think here we have a clear case of two sides of an argument that are not listening to each other.
I know how it feels, I used to get like that when faced with BillC's barrage of (mostly) political propaganda clips. But it's something we have to fight against i.e. allowing our emotional attachment to certain ideas and concepts shut off any attempt to see an alternative point of view.
A sense of another perspective can really help get our minds around a point of contention at times and gain a deeper understanding of why we think what we do. If we are lucky it also leads us to better articulate our views and quell that spluttering sense of "NONSENSE!!!!" that sometimes seizes hold of our posting fingers :chuckles:.
I know how it feels, I used to get like that when faced with BillC's barrage of (mostly) political propaganda clips. But it's something we have to fight against i.e. allowing our emotional attachment to certain ideas and concepts shut off any attempt to see an alternative point of view.
A sense of another perspective can really help get our minds around a point of contention at times and gain a deeper understanding of why we think what we do. If we are lucky it also leads us to better articulate our views and quell that spluttering sense of "NONSENSE!!!!" that sometimes seizes hold of our posting fingers :chuckles:.
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
True. I stopped listening when he said the constitution does not apply to him since he didn't sign it.
Does a contract apply to you if you don't sign it? Why is any piece of paper different?
This is actually an old argument from an 18th century abolitionist named Lysander Spooner. The world get's very strange when you start asking questions and looking at things objectively.
I guess the the answer here is the same as what's been given above. The Constitution applies to me because the people around me believe it does...and they are willing to initiate force to force that on me. That's why the answer live with it or move sit's so readily on people's tongues when this question is asked.
Still, it should be noted, this is not a contract. It is rule through force. And people like you are the enforcers.
ballen0351
Sr. Grandmaster
And your free to leave anytime you want. By staying here you agree to follow the rules we have in place. You don't like the rules your free to go live someplace that has rules you like better. I'm sorry there is no lawless fantasy land that allows you to act or behave anyway you want. That's not how living in a society works. Its not how being an adult works. When you became an adult you had the choice stay or go. By staying you have given your consent to the contract. You don't like it tough suck it up butter cup. Welcome to reality
oftheherd1
Senior Master
Unless you are a lot older than I take you for, you certainly did not sign the US Constitution. However, it is the basis for all the laws of the United States, and our form of government. When you live in the USA, you accept that and the laws that have been passed by the federal, state, commonwealth, tribal, local or whatever. If you do not comply with those laws, you must be prepared to accept the consequences of the law. Or, you can simply move out of the jurisdiction, the laws of which you don't agree.
You don't have to agree with any of the laws, but you do have to obey them or accept the consequences.
That is a rather ridiculous statement don't you think? You are showing your agreement, or at least acquiesence (pretty much the same thing reference obeying a law) to the constitution by choosing to remain under its jurisdiction. So how is Tgace any different? Simply because he becomes an instrument of its enforcement? He still has to obey all the laws himself. If he doesn't, he will potentially, and probably will, face the same consequences as you or any other citizen.
Your remark about Tgace enforcing his opinions with a gun is insulting not only to Tgace, but all law enforcement. You try to cleverly use your words to imply Tgace and other policemen only enforce their own opinions, not law. And that doesn't leave any room for a policeman to enforce a law that he may not agree with. He must enforce even those laws he doesn't agree with. But your 'clever' use of words may be a web that takes you in as well.
In your dojo, if someone does not agree with your opinion, no matter what it is, do you enforce your belief on them by use of MA, since I presume you don't carry a firearm in you dojo? If you don't, then why would you assume Tgace or other police would do so only to enforce their opinions? Remember, opinions are not law, no matter how much you try to vilify someone by saying so.
I disagree. This contract is forced on an individual at birth. It was spread through North America and beyond through the use of force. It isn't a "contract" in any sense of the word. It's a fiat that states that a certain group of individuals the exclusive right to initiate force in a given geographic area.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fiat
An individual can flee the fiat or they can stay for many different reasons, including simply not having the resources to flee. This is not the same as consenting to the fiat.
I don't have the right to enforce my opinion on anyone. I wouldn't want that power. In my dojo, if someone doesn't like what I'm doing, they can leave. It's a voluntary association that many call the free market.
This is very different from how Tgace and other police officers choose to operate. They agree when they take their jobs that they will enforce the rules of the State good or bad. They may disagree with a rule, but they are still required to enforce it. My point is to only illustrate that there is a potential contradiction between thought and action here. To put it simply, "words are wind." The words and thoughts of a person do not actually demonstrate commitment to principles or opinions. Only actions demonstrate commitment. So, the real opinion of every cop of rips out someones blackberry and okra bushes while pointing guns at non-violent farmers is demonstrated by their actions. Their actions show that they are committed to an opinion that someone else has and are willing to enforce that opinion at gun point.
Ultimately, it's a matter of integrity to principles.
Tgace
Grandmaster
Exactly...and I took an oath to defend it. Try me.
Sent from my SCH-I405 using Tapatalk 2
If you took an oath to defend the constitution and the government you serve violates the constitution, how do you reconcile this?
Similar threads
Latest Discussions
-
-
-
重心 Zhòngxīn center of gravity- Latest: windwalker099
-
-
-