State government = government. States having the right to outlaw abortion = increasing government intrusion into private lives in those states that do so. Not really that hard to figure out.Originally Posted by Justin '77
"And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward Bethlehem to be born?"
My blog: https://brianrushwriter.wordpress.com/
The Order Master (volume one of Refuge), a science fantasy. Amazon link: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00GZZWEAS
Smashwords link: https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/382903
A very interesting article based on long-term polling data about who the Tea Party actually are. No extreme group has ever had comparable power in American politics in my opinion. It may however not last.
David Kaiser '47
My blog: History Unfolding
My book: The Road to Dallas: The Assassination of John F. Kennedy
My ass, he didn't. He was selected to run practically from the get-go. IIRC, only Clinton was around as a plausible alternative, but she never had the broad showing that HopeyChangey did.Obama didn't run to win either.
And in any case, it's not about what Paul wants (if it were even reasonable to guess about that). It's what the system wants. And in addition to power for its own sake, the system wants to retain legitimacy. Paul serves that second purpose extremely well.
"Qu'est-ce que c'est que cela, la loi ? On peut donc être dehors. Je ne comprends pas. Quant à moi, suis-je dans la loi ? suis-je hors la loi ? Je n'en sais rien. Mourir de faim, est-ce être dans la loi ?" -- Tellmarch
"Человек не может снять с себя ответственности за свои поступки." - L. Tolstoy
"[it] is no doubt obvious, the cult of the experts is both self-serving, for those who propound it, and fraudulent." - Noam Chomsky
It really should not be necessary to say this, but hate to just let it pass. The purpose of limiting abortion is to protect the life of the person in the womb. From that perspective, it has nothing to do with protecting individual freedom, but everything to do with protecting life. This is the great and continuing divide of the abortion debate.
James50
The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected. - G.K. Chesterton
He isn't running for God, or even King. He could not become president and suddenly decree that abortion is illegal, anymore than Obama could become president and decree sharia law to be the law of the land.
Abortion is a non-starter anyway. Both the parties love the controversy, it keeps a fair amount of people in both of their camps. The GOP can say "we want to end it or at least curtail it, vote for me!" and the Dems can say "oh, those Republicans are getting mighty close to overturning it, vote for me to stop them!" Another way they keep the sheep divided.
"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."
Malcolm Reynolds
"I ran across a book recently which suggested that the peace and prosperity of a culture was solely related to how many librarians it contained. Possibly a slight overstatement. But a culture that doesn't value its librarians doesn't value ideas and without ideas, well, where are we?"
Lucien, Librarian of Dream (from The Sandman, issue 57 (1993) by Neil Gaiman)
Early-wave GenX
And I might add:
Federal government having the right to tell it citizens they must buy health insurance = increasing government intrusion into private lives. Not really that hard to figure out.
"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."
Malcolm Reynolds
"I ran across a book recently which suggested that the peace and prosperity of a culture was solely related to how many librarians it contained. Possibly a slight overstatement. But a culture that doesn't value its librarians doesn't value ideas and without ideas, well, where are we?"
Lucien, Librarian of Dream (from The Sandman, issue 57 (1993) by Neil Gaiman)
Early-wave GenX
Right. Except that, by that very argument, we already have the situation today that Kiff seems to be decrying. After all, since the federal government has the right to outlaw abortion (and, of course, since it has the right to legalize it, the converse necessarily follows), that means, by your argument, that the government already intrudes into private lives.
So again, what Paul has said represents at the very least absolutely no increase whatsoever in the government's intrusion in private lives.
"Qu'est-ce que c'est que cela, la loi ? On peut donc être dehors. Je ne comprends pas. Quant à moi, suis-je dans la loi ? suis-je hors la loi ? Je n'en sais rien. Mourir de faim, est-ce être dans la loi ?" -- Tellmarch
"Человек не может снять с себя ответственности за свои поступки." - L. Tolstoy
"[it] is no doubt obvious, the cult of the experts is both self-serving, for those who propound it, and fraudulent." - Noam Chomsky
So far Boomers have Clinton (OK, but far from great) and one of the absolute worst (Dubya). Should Rick Perry or Michele Bachman succeed President Obama in 2012, then the Boom Generation likely comes out the worst generation in American political history. The Gilded at least left America in better economic shape than they knew in childhood. If President Obama should be a well-defined success (which will require a second term and Democrats taking the House while holding onto the Senate), then the ambiguity of someone on the boundary between Boom and X might be resolved in the direction of Obama as a Boomer. I see Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann as figures incompetent enough that either could go down in a military coup if elected, especially under questionable circumstances.
Whether one puts President Obama in the Boom or Thirteenth may become a quibble. Boomers are not too young to succeed even two terms of Barack Obama...Andrew Cuomo (60) and Amy Klobuchar (56) would still be young enough in 2017 to rescue the reputation of the Boomer generation. Maybe President Obama is the one who sets most things straight before some elderly Boomer gets to be the political equivalent of the Grey Champion. Remember that a bunch of Republican winners of 2010 -- Tea Party types likely to be far out of step with their states (Ayotte in New Hampshire, Toomey in Pennsylvania, Portman in Ohio, Kirk in Illinois, Johnson in Wisconsin, and perhaps Rubio in Florida or Paul in Kentucky, the last legacy of the Tea Party Cult influence in America) and some very old Republican Senators who have gone decidedly from moderation to the Hard Right (McCain in Arizona, Grassley in Iowa) will be likely to retire.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."
― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
The question of abortion isn't even completely settled among Libertarians. Libertarians tend to be pro-choice simply because when they have doubt about an issue they default to not infringing on freedom.
If one rejects laissez faire on account of mans fallibility and moral weakness, one must for the same reason also reject every kind of government action.
- Ludwig von Mises
Beware of altruism. It is based on self-deception, the root of all evil.
- Lazarus Long
God knows, I want Obama to succeed, but this bus tour stuff is depressing.
Guess I am into the Heinlein quotes today:"We had reversed the recession, avoided a depression, gotten the economy moving again," Obama told a crowd in Decorah, Iowa. "But over the last six months we've had a run of bad luck." Obama listed three events overseas -- the Arab Spring uprisings, the tsunami in Japan, and the European debt crises -- which set the economy back.
Please, Mr. President, I don't want to hear about bad luck. Hope was better.Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
This is known as "bad luck."
James50
Last edited by James50; 08-17-2011 at 05:28 PM.
The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected. - G.K. Chesterton
Well, since I don't buy into Right Libertarian dogma, I'm okay with some levels of intrusion.
I don't personally think that having to purchase health insurance is all that intrusive. The consequences of not having it in a catastrophic situation are pretty dire. It just makes sense to have it.
Having the government -- state OR federal -- telling me I can't use birth control (some anti-abortion folks DO take it that far) is much more intrusive.
No, that's what the disinterested cynics keep on saying, and it's crap. It is a significant issue and a very real divide between two ways of thinking in this country.
He must have been channeling Ms. Rand (via John Galt) that day. Blech.
I don't think it is crap. Both parties use social issues as a matter to point to the opposing party and say "look, they're trying to take your rights away!".
You're right about the religious conservatives who make gay rights and abortion an issue. Intrusiveness.
At the same time you have leftists (Eric Green here comes to mind) who make guns an issue. More intrusiveness. Both parties use fear on these social issues to win elections.
The right thing to do would be for both parties to drop the social issues entirely and focus on economic ones. But neither party will do this.
If there is one thing Barack Obama has proven beyond a doubt, it is that he is not, and has no intention, of being a Prophet. He has bragged about not being a Boomer--and he isn't. His mother was! (Well, actually, I'd say a *Silent, like my brother, same age, also graduated HS in 1960--but she is a '43er.)
I think he will probably be re-elected--the competition looks worse every day--and not accomplish very mujch.
You did forget about Romney.
David Kaiser '47
My blog: History Unfolding
My book: The Road to Dallas: The Assassination of John F. Kennedy
Yea, I understand, but every time he talks about bad luck, I will think of it. Hopefully some political adviser will tell him to talk about something else. Its not what we need.He must have been channeling Ms. Rand (via John Galt) that day. Blech.
James50
The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of the Conservatives is to prevent the mistakes from being corrected. - G.K. Chesterton
I wouldn't want to put any money on Obamas re-election chances. Gallup came out today showing only 26% approve of how Obama is handling the economy. And the GOP candidate (whoever it is) has over a year to reinvent themselves to the public as a better alternative to Obama.
Short story is..he needs to show some results..and soon.
Unlike Bachmann and Perry, Romney is difficult to figure out except that he is a Boomer. I can't predict what sort of President he would be because he is all over the map. Bachmann and Perry would both be execrable -- both worse than Dubya because Bachmann would impose a witch-hunt and because Perry would open the warehouse to the Religious Right.
The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" (or) even in concentration camps and labour camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered... in clean, carpeted, warmed and well-lighted offices, by (those) who do not need to raise their voices. Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern."
― C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters
Ahhh and there is the meat of it. You are okay with government intrusion as long as you happen to agree with the intrusion (Those folks who don't? Fuck em.). You are just fine with being a loyal subject as long as your side is king. Well if you please, allow me to say that I find that sort of "thought" completely pathetic.
That said I applaud your honesty. It is a rare thing indeed to see someone come out in support of their "massa."
† And in deference to our hyper-politically-correct-cowardice-legalese-driven-culture, allow me to confirm that the previous statement is in no way aimed at the current President of the United States, nor should it be construed in any such fashion that would imply it does. And let me also state publically that I briefly considered posting this paragraph using a smaller font and typeface as a joke but decided against it because some hyper-politically-correct-cowardice-legalese-driven-folks might not get "the joke." Oh screw it, I am going to post this paragraph using a small font size and different typeface anyway. I am a "risk driven" person, so sue me.
Gah, what is it with y'all, anarchists? So either-or, black-or-white?
I am a freedom lover or I'm a "loyal subject?"
(Talk about pathetic -- it's funny how the "massa" thing rears its ugly head whenever you pure libertarian types get challenged)
Laughable.
Last edited by Child of Socrates; 08-17-2011 at 09:45 PM.
As I understand it, the pill doesn't necessarily prevent conception, only implantation. So the pill may be "murdering" a fertilized egg and should be outlawed, if you take these arguments to their logical conclusion.
Well said but let me flesh this out a bit because it is important.
Everyone has seen The Matrix series correct? Not a particularly great series outside of the original film. A poor and anti-climactic ending in Revolutions which unfortunately ignored the revelations in the second film ruined it for the most part. But it is in the philosophy behind The Matrix where things really shine. You see The Matrix is not an action piece; it's a parody of human society. It's a mockumentary of the human "need" to be governed as a whole but for our sake let’s just focus on it as a critique of our modern society/government. The primary plot is a parody (drenched in sci-fi) of the current systems of control that keep humans obedient, asleep and generating "power." In the second film is a scene with a character named The Architect. Most non-computer programmers missed the point of this scene so I will explain it because it is important to Justin's point and is one of the most perfect illustrations of it found in media.
In any system of control over a species with the ability of freedom of choice it becomes possible (and in fact likely) that a small percentage of the controlled population will in fact reject the control. If left alone the population rejecting the system will grow over time and eventually cause the system to collapse. Thus anyone wishing to run a system with the goal of dominating a population needs to not only account for the controlled population but also for the small portion that rejects the control. In The Matrix universe this accounting takes the form of an imaginary war. This war means a great deal to those who believe they are rejecting control but ultimately end up simply playing the game within the system under a different layer of control. The anomalies are eventually disposed of, the system recycles and the rejections begin again all while being completely predictable under the current system. The rejection of control is not the act of a more-intelligent maverick, lone wolf or counter-culture. Quite the opposite is true. The rejection of control is something that can be modeled and controlled itself.
Computer programmers do this today, not with people, but with errors. Errors are controlled by the use of error dumps of various sorts. These dumps have the same purpose; to make sure that small errors do not grow over time and collapse the system.
Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, Ralph Nader, the Tea Party, the Green Party, the Red Party, and all so-called "Independents" are error dumps. They keep the few errors that reject the system under control and in sight where they can be dealt with in the appropriate manner.
Oh you aren't challenging me, nor am I a "libertarian type." You might not realize this but anarchist != libertarian. You are a librarian type right? You might want to look those philosophical differences up just to... You know... Avoid that confusion in the future.
I also would never state that you love freedom. Your comments suggest otherwise.
This is why discussions about "freedom" in the abstract are useless. One person's "freedom" is another person's "atrocity".
To recommend thrift to the poor is both grotesque and insulting. It is like advising a man who is starving to eat less.
-Oscar Wilde, The Soul of Man under Socialism
Right! But look at the design of the system. If the primary layer of control acts as though those who reject the control are illegitimate and adversarial by design, then the reactions of the rejected can be modeled and also controlled. They are still playing the game and fighting the war within the system. Indeed the only way to beat the system then becomes not playing by its rules. The error must willingly crash the system.
