All Comments

  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Excuse you, but I didn't say neo-nazis, I said members of the inner circle of the nazi party... and not being American, whatever rights they have are not protected.

    Again with the troll-bait, Maph. That's not why the bit about cruel and unusual punishment was put in the Constitution. I've already explained it to you elsewhere, I don't feel like repeating myself to the willfully obtuse.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "Regulation is necessary to ensure health, safety, and fairness."

    Check your premise.

    Where is it written that health, safety and fairness must be ensured? Certainly not in "nature". The Founding Fathers demanded liberty or death, not liberty or health, safety and fairness.

    And either there is no freedom to enslave others, or there is freedom to enslave others. You can't make exceptions for what YOU think are noble causes.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Lucky 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I have read a little about Sears, I understood the collapse to be from the application of pop-psychology and performance measures. Any explanation from Salon carries little weight. The chap was a banker with no demonstrated skill in management. He got there not from success in the field but from money.
    A good example of it being better to judge by experience rather than by claimed capability.

    I am not aware that there is an economic theory in which free markets automatically and quickly self-correct. It is clear that government intervention is a cause of collapse and does not assist recovery whatever the cause. Perhaps institutions like the Fed from their very nature cannot be managed well and it would be better not to have them. Economic libertarianism is not convincing to me. What I am convinced of is that implementing the ideas of Marx and Keynes lead to disaster.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by LetsShrug 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "..... homosexuals are MEN and WOMEN are entitled to the same rights as every other man and woman. To provide RIGHTS for sexual preference (biological or otherwise) is ridiculous and invites chaos. "
    Yes, yes and YES! Can we please kill the topic now and lay it to rest?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by edweaver 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Homosexuality may possibly be considered a part of nature but in no way is it normal. There is only one purpose to sex and that is procreation , period.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The "Great Society" programs along with the CRA have done more to suppress equality than any other policy or program ever in the US. It is made more insidious in that the suppression is voluntary and wrapped in "entitlement" with an undercurrent of "reparations."
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    In fact, we need our rights protected from the LGBTQ (can't forget the Q's) community. They insist that you bake their cakes, host their parties, and open up your restrooms to anyone.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by edweaver 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Never said anything about eliminating. Tax and regulation certainly is required but it must be kept to a bare minimum because when it becomes excessive it makes everyone slaves to the institution. IMHO we are more than double the minimum both in taxes and regulation. We have turned the producers into tax slaves and the poor into slaves of the handouts.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • -1
    Posted by Maphesdus 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "Would this include the inner circle of the Nazi party? Skinheads? Child molesters?"
    ---
    Yes, it would. When prosecuting Neo-Nazis and child molesters and inducting them into the criminal justice system, they still retain a certain level of basic human rights which cannot be violated, even though they've broken the law. The Constitution specifically forbids cruel and unusual punishment because the Founding Fathers recognized that even criminals have human rights.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 10 years, 9 months ago
    What total load of crap!! There are real things going on in the world, there are real needs for education and understanding-but this post/link is mal-education and complete mis-understanding.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • -2
    Posted by Maphesdus 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    You'd think that simply saying "everyone has equal human rights" would be enough to protect minorities from persecution. Unfortunately, history has shown us that that simply isn't true. In order for minorities to be protected from persecution, it is necessary to create legal protections explicitly targeting them.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    A load of crap.

    There is nothing natural or biologically productive about homosexuality. While its origin may be some type of biological imbalance or deficiency it does nothing to propagate the species. Homosexuality is either an imbalance or deficiency OR it is a human choice to deviate form the gene pool.

    This is a REALITY that no amount of agenda can spin.

    Even so, homosexuals are MEN and WOMEN are entitled to the same rights as every other man and woman. To provide RIGHTS for sexual preference (biological or otherwise) is ridiculous and invites chaos.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • -2
    Posted by Maphesdus 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Obviously the Civil Rights Act is not a part of the Constitution. I never said it was. However, it is NOT a violation of the Constitution.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • -1
    Posted by Maphesdus 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Regulation is necessary to ensure health, safety, and fairness. Taxation is necessary to fund the military, police, court systems, and public services.

    Granted, they both hold the potential to be taken to excessive and harmful extremes, but to do away with either of them completely would be harmful in a different way.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • -2
    Posted by Maphesdus 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "And there's scientific evidence of the biological and genetic origins of diabetes and Alzheimer's. Doesn't make them normal or natural, either."
    ---
    Actually, yes it does. The very definition of the word "natural" is something that has its origins in nature. And nothing could be a bigger part of nature than genetics and biology.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • -3
    Posted by Maphesdus 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Natural = created by nature

    There is a common misconception that "natural" is equivalent with "common." Nothing could be further from the truth, as nature is in control of both common and uncommon characteristics. The fact that a particular trait is uncommon does not in any way make it unnatural.

    Sexual orientation is controlled by biology, and therefore must be subject to mutation and deviation, just like every other aspect of biology.
    _________________
    "I don’t really have a word “artificial” ...I don’t really have a word “unnatural.” I say, “if nature permits it, it is natural if nature doesn’t permit it, you can’t do it.” You may not be familiar with the fact that nature allows that, but the fact of your unfamiliarity doesn’t make it unnatural. If it is unfamiliar to us we tend to say it is artificial or unnatural."
    — R. Buckminster Fuller
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • -4
    Posted by Maphesdus 10 years, 9 months ago in reply to this comment.
    A law which forbids both rich and poor from sleeping under a bridge at night is a law of equality, but it is not a law of fairness, as it clearly hurts only the poor, though all people are required to follow it equally. Sometimes laws do need to take class into consideration in order to be fair.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo