djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 27, 2017 16:27:19 GMT -5
1. "admit you use an archaic definition of 'liberal'" ≠ "ADMITTED [my use] of the term liberal is correct"
no matter, since BOTH are false.
2. You adhere to the dictionary definition, which hasn't changed in 200 years. It is, by definition, archaic.
this is also false. i have told you this before.
the dictionary is a repository of CONTEMPORARY USAGE**. the reason we HAVE dictionaries is so that we can see the CONSENSUS use of words in our language. the CONSENSUS use of the world liberal is that which is found in the dictionary. your MISUSE of the word is NOT found there. that is because the people who review these words EVERY YEAR have decided that your MISUSE is either:
a) deliberately confusing OR b) incorrect OR c) both
i would vote for (c). your meaning is both incorrect and deliberately confusing.
i spent the better part of a day researching dictionaries the last time you brought this up. i found it very interesting, and i thank you for it. however, either you are not recalling the discussion, or you are intentionally ignoring it, just as you did, then.
PLEASE DESIST.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Dec 27, 2017 16:28:34 GMT -5
tallguy: I've moved your post to the graveyard for now. It's a good post, but it's got far too much about abortion in it and complaints were raised the last time you broached the subject in this thread. I've flagged it so that the other mods can take a look. It might end up in the inferno. Even if so, I won't be able to engage you on the topic. Sorry. Them's the rule. - Virgil (Mod)
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Dec 27, 2017 16:30:43 GMT -5
*ahem* 4. If you'd like me to respect a request to end a debate, please speak calmly and respectfully, do not present new arguments, and do not rebut existing ones. I would not expect anything less from myself if I was asking you to abort an argument. Alternatively, you can ignore me. However, since your font size seems to be growing by the minute, I'll do you a solid and not dissect your latest reply. You're welcome.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 27, 2017 16:34:50 GMT -5
4. If you'd like me to respect a request to end a debate, please speak calmly and respectfully,
i already did that. at least once, if not twice.
do not present new arguments,
these are not new arguments. you know that. you are a search expert. stop making false claims. thanks.
and do not rebut existing ones. I would not expect anything less from myself if I was asking you to abort an argument. Alternatively, you can ignore me.
you're a bit slow on the take up, aren't you?
please desist. for at least the third, and (i think) the fourth time, and at least twice, NICELY.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,221
|
Post by tallguy on Dec 27, 2017 16:36:23 GMT -5
tallguy : I've moved your post to the graveyard for now. It's a good post, but it's got far too much about abortion in it and complaints were raised the last time you broached the subject in this thread. I've flagged it so that the other mods can take a look. It might end up in the inferno. Even if so, I won't be able to engage you on the topic. Sorry. Them's the rule. - Virgil (Mod) It was your citation, and your author. My contention was that he had a fairly good article until he turned it into bull****.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 27, 2017 16:38:28 GMT -5
i checked. the higher number was right (182, 187 = nice. 190 = still nice but impossible to ignore. you know, if you actually comply with the nice requests, you might find that fewer people yell at you. just a suggestion).
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Dec 27, 2017 16:44:06 GMT -5
It was your citation, and your author. My contention was that he had a fairly good article until he turned it into bull****. I understand that. And frankly I don't think your mentioning it here (or before) is tantamount to "discussing it". But some posters are triggered by the specific material you quoted and the thread has enough controversy already. As I've said, I've flagged it for review. It might be resurrected here or in the inferno.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,221
|
Post by tallguy on Dec 27, 2017 16:46:22 GMT -5
Here would be better. It was not out of place, or off-topic.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Dec 27, 2017 16:46:30 GMT -5
i checked. the higher number was right (182, 187 = nice. 190 = still nice but impossible to ignore. you know, if you actually comply with the nice requests, you might find that fewer people yell at you. just a suggestion).
Let's all calm down and have a holiday beer, eh? Beer fixes all things.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,221
|
Post by tallguy on Dec 27, 2017 16:48:21 GMT -5
Beer is revolting. And so...common.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Dec 27, 2017 16:55:58 GMT -5
Here would be better. It was not out of place, or off-topic. It goes back to the same problem we had in the Moore aide thread re religion. You or I can post something that isn't, by itself, over the line, but can only reasonably be rebutted by a post that does go over the line. Hence there's frustration associated with this. Also, we really are ridiculously off-topic at this point. Mainly because there's nothing else to discuss, but I digress.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,294
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Dec 27, 2017 17:29:42 GMT -5
asking me to be calm implies that i was upset. i wasn't. however, since you ignored two polite requests at 12 point, i figured i would try 36 point, in case you had misplaced your glasses. i also tried to limit the profanities. i know you're sensitive. now, please get back to the subject or find another thread that you find more entertaining. thanks. oh, and i don't drink beer or wine. just fyi.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Dec 27, 2017 17:43:31 GMT -5
i also tried to limit the profanities. I appreciate that, BTW. Makes me feel like I'm at a university or symposium instead of the tetherball court at my old middle school.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 1, 2024 16:48:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2017 17:54:00 GMT -5
Virgil. Do you support the right of parents to freely homeschool their children with no regulations set by the state? Yes. How about you? Nope. Because I believe parental rights need to be balanced with child rights.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 1, 2024 16:48:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2017 17:57:35 GMT -5
Holy fuck. V posts and article. Tall aptly critiques the article but tall gets graveyarded by V. Conservatives like to say they aren’t the censors of safe places, but ... well... happy holidays and all that...
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Dec 27, 2017 18:37:46 GMT -5
Nope. Because I believe parental rights need to be balanced with child rights. So do I. But large governments aren't necessary to ensure either parental or child rights. The government of a small community suffices perfectly well. In fairness, you didn't specify the size of "the state" and I'm just assuming you're thinking of something much bigger than the leadership of a community. If this isn't the case, then we agree.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Dec 27, 2017 18:41:02 GMT -5
V posts and article. Tall aptly critiques the article but tall gets graveyarded by V. If the other mods disagree, they can ungraveyard the post with no objections from me. I'd be happy to engage Tall. I didn't make the rules. I didn't make the complaints. I won't make the final judgment. Be reasonable.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 1, 2024 16:48:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2017 18:41:43 GMT -5
So each school district would set its own regulations/ determine what rights a child was entitled to?
Leadership of a cult community?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 1, 2024 16:48:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2017 18:43:07 GMT -5
V posts and article. Tall aptly critiques the article but tall gets graveyarded by V. If the other mods disagree, they can ungraveyard the post with no objections from me. I'd be happy to engage Tall. I didn't make the rules. I didn't make the complaints. I won't make the final judgment. Be reasonable. YOU posted the source. I guess with the idea that the source couldn’t be debated. That’s dirty play in my book. Asserting the narrative in a way that automatically limits the ability of others to respond.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Dec 27, 2017 19:29:44 GMT -5
If the other mods disagree, they can ungraveyard the post with no objections from me. I'd be happy to engage Tall. I didn't make the rules. I didn't make the complaints. I won't make the final judgment. Be reasonable. YOU posted the source. I guess with the idea that the source couldn’t be debated. That’s dirty play in my book. Asserting the narrative in a way that automatically limits the ability of others to respond. The part of the article Tall jumped on was a minor and ancillary component. Easily 99% of the article has nothing to do with it. It was his choice to fixate on it. Moreover, he was/is more than welcome to post his reply in the inferno, which he should have done given his choice to take the conversation in that direction. If the other mods consider my link comparing classical to contemporary liberalism "unfair", I'll submit to their judgment and remove the link from my posts and any quotes. I'll do it right now if you want me to. I'm sure we'd all rather have no link than an angry oped.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Dec 27, 2017 19:41:14 GMT -5
So each school district would set its own regulations/ determine what rights a child was entitled to? As the rights pertained to education, yes. I don't know what a "cult community" is, but assuming it serves the same social function as a non-cult community: yes. How about you? What do you believe is the smallest governmental unit fit to regulate every child's education, and what aspects of that education (if any) would be exempt from their dictates?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 1, 2024 16:48:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2017 19:56:28 GMT -5
So a child has no right to rise above the circle/station within which it’s parents choose to place him/her?
Education is everything in terms of mobility. One person should not be able to limit another’s access to education.
I think there should be national regulations for accountability. We used to have good ones in PA, but they have been relaxed somewhat, which I oppose. The local district administers the state regulations in PA. But in some states there is no oversight whatsoever ever, and students have no guaranteed right to an education.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,221
|
Post by tallguy on Dec 27, 2017 20:18:32 GMT -5
YOU posted the source. I guess with the idea that the source couldn’t be debated. That’s dirty play in my book. Asserting the narrative in a way that automatically limits the ability of others to respond. The part of the article Tall jumped on was a minor and ancillary component. Easily 99% of the article has nothing to do with it. It was his choice to fixate on it. Moreover, he was/is more than welcome to post his reply in the inferno, which he should have done given his choice to take the conversation in that direction. If the other mods consider my link comparing classical to contemporary liberalism "unfair", I'll submit to their judgment and remove the link from my posts and any quotes. I'll do it right now if you want me to. I'm sure we'd all rather have no link than an angry oped. I think I quoted his final two paragraphs, which is where one generally goes to find summaries, conclusions, and points the author wants to emphasize. The part about abortion was what, two sentence fragments? And I think it was your author with an angry op-ed.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 1, 2024 16:48:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2017 21:15:25 GMT -5
LOL... I don't have any hatred for religion. How can someone hate a made up fantasy? What I hate is people that think that they have the right to force their beliefs onto others... especially in a society that's supposed to have separation of Church and State. This is tantamount to saying you don't hate cars, you just hate it when people drive them on public roads, or keep the parked in public lots, or use the word "cars" in governmental documents. Strangely enough, you're still indistinguishable from somebody who hates cars. Call it what you want. We're no strangers to agreeing to disagree. My point is that it motivates your non-libertarian view on anti-discrimination laws. That's a very bad analogy, and here's why. Your ownership of a car doesn't stop me from owning one. Nor does your lack of ownership of a car stop me from owning one. Nor does your ownership of a car require me to own the same make model and color of car that you own if I do choose to own one. Nor does your ownership of a car require me to drive the car based on how you drive your car (if I even own one). I don't have a problem with cars on the road or in public lots (they don't force any rules upon me or other people, just by existing. I don't force any rules upon them). And your foray into "the word 'cars' in governmental documents" is simply ludicrous. They can have the religious words in government documents if they like... but there can't be RULES based on the religions (just like there can't be "across the board" laws based on a specific model of car).
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 1, 2024 16:48:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2017 21:22:40 GMT -5
You can't have a "genderless spectrum" or "sexless spectrum". It's an oxymoron because "genderless"/"sexless" means "zero genders/sexes" and "spectrum" means a wide range of options". Zero will NEVER equal "wide range of options"... no matter how hard you try and mold them.
***** I'm pure libertarian on anti-discrimination laws as well... Libertarians aren't anarchists. We recognize that SOME laws MUST exist for society to function... because people can be assholes. Anti discrimination "Laws" (plural) don't need to exist in the thousands though... there just need to be one (in keeping with the "less laws is better laws", Libertarian philosophy): "Treat everyone equally." Three simple words. That's it. Lol. Lawyers and other assorted assholes would have a field day with that law. That eliminates ALL ADA compliance and all special education. I can only imagine how far someone on a mission could go on this law. ADA laws would be separate laws. They are not "anti-discrimination" in nature. They are "Special access requirements" in nature. I was only speaking of laws to cover anti-discrimination. None of the ADA accommodations laws would fall under that three word law. If lawyers would have a field day with it though, when it comes to anti-discrimination... that's a problem with the lawyers. There's too much legalese these days. Maybe if we took a cue from Back to the Future...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 1, 2024 16:48:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2017 21:24:48 GMT -5
This is tantamount to saying you don't hate cars, you just hate it when people drive them on public roads, or keep the parked in public lots, or use the word "cars" in governmental documents. Strangely enough, you're still indistinguishable from somebody who hates cars. Call it what you want. We're no strangers to agreeing to disagree. My point is that it motivates your non-libertarian view on anti-discrimination laws. I remember someone on this board suggesting religion is like a penis. It only becomes an issue when someone pulls theirs out and starts playing with it in public. ... Or when they try to force/impose it on others.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 1, 2024 16:48:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2017 21:29:32 GMT -5
I remember someone on this board suggesting religion is like a penis. It only becomes an issue when someone pulls theirs out and starts playing with it in public. So change it to "Cars are like a penis. ..." My point being that despising public religion is tantamount to despising religion itself.
If you want another analogy, back in the days when public homosexuality was illegal and homosexuals lived "in the closet", if a lawmaker supporting the status quo said to you "I don't hate homosexuality; I just hate public homosexuality.", would you believe him? I should hope not. And I should hope he'd have the compunction to admit he hates homosexuality. And you would be right... if anyone had that view. I don't despise public religion. Build your Churches, Mosques, Temples, whatever. Hold your ceremonies in public. Have a blast. Enjoy. Just don't force others to participate with you against their will, and don't prevent others from following their beliefs.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 1, 2024 16:48:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2017 21:39:35 GMT -5
I think the problem Virgil is some conservatives like to invent words they think are catchy instead of caring whether they are useful, contribute anything meaningful to the dialogue (instead of just going for annoying pro conservative marketing), and make sense. I am not a fan of all the new gender terms like cis gender, but at least they exist to make sense of a spectrum of human gender behavior. They were created to enlighten, not to confuse, not to denigrate.
On the other hand, it is obvious to me the made up terms of paleo conservative and paleo liberal are made to denigrate and make fun of whomever those labels are applied to. Paleo is from the greek word ancient. The US is too young to have ancient anything. The RW can market all they want, but the more made up words they start slinging around, the less I listen to anything at all that they say. To me, it becomes pure noise. Much like you seem to see any discussion of gender and your unwillingness to really understand what Richard was telling you about religion. He doesn't want religion practiced in public. Simple. It doesn't mean he hates it anymore than we should conclude you hate sex because you believe it should be practiced in private. Versteht? Actually, I just don't want it forced upon others... not sure where the idea that I don't think it should be allowed in public came from.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jun 1, 2024 16:48:42 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2017 21:47:24 GMT -5
Yet more proof, that public practice of religion is not indispensable. I'd have to rebut this in RD. Rather than go down that rabbit hole, I'll point out that your public sex analogy fails for another reason: most people (myself included) oppose public sex because they consider it indecent. Richard has gone on record in the past saying he considers nothing indecent except that which is inherently harmful to others (i.e. that which he hates). Hence he couldn't oppose public religion for the same reason I oppose public sex. Yes. I have gone on record that I consider nothing indecent except that which is inherently harmful to others... but that has nothing to do with things I hate. I hate murder, but it's indecent because it harms others. I hate rape because it harms others. I hate thievery because it harms others (granted, it's just "stuff" but they had to work for that stuff, and will have to work to replace it). I hate homosexual sex (as in, not happening to me, ever), but it's NOT "indecent" because it DOESN'T hurt others (as long as it's consensual). I hate riding motorcycles (too long to explain), but it's not indecent for people that love them to ride them. I hate religious nutjobs that think it's okay to force their beliefs upon others, but religion, itself is not indecent because religion itself harms no one (it's the ignorant fanatics that do the harming). Are you seeing the pattern yet? It's not whether I hate or love something... it's whether or not it causes harm to others.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Dec 27, 2017 21:53:01 GMT -5
Education is everything in terms of mobility. One person should not be able to limit another’s access to education. It's the lesser of two evils, unfortunately. Also, you're talking as though there's no oversight beyond the family at all, which isn't the case. I think there should be national regulations for accountability. This was Marx' argument in his manifesto, and is roughly the status quo in the entire developed world. The exception being that homeschooling is still allowed in some countries--the US being one of them. Not every child is forced into a state-run institution as was the case under Leninist and Stalinist communism. This may eventually change. It has its virtues but is ultimately a fatally flawed system, doomed to collapse, which is already well underway.
|
|