File[PhilosophyOfLiberty.swf] - (1.02 MB)
[_] [?] Anonymous 09/06/10(Mon)21:16 No.

  i don't fully agree with it, but i like it.

Marked for deletion (old).

>> [_] Anonymous 09/06/10(Mon)22:23 No.

  I don't see why nobody wouldn't agree to this. Seems solid.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/06/10(Mon)22:38 No.

  >>1366647
  you don't fully agree with it because you have values that you wish to see succeed. you feel
  something must be done to make these things happen and allowing yourself to agree with the
  absolute truth displayed herein hinders the available means to achieve your end.

  >>1366590
  it is truth, and everyone should be able to easily see it. the only ones who would question it
  have their own motives or viewpoints as to how the world should be. they want to use whatever
  force needed to accomplish their goals.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/06/10(Mon)22:39 No.

  >>1366651
  (continued)

  any Amerifags who disagree with this need to research the extent of the power of the federal
  government. look up the 18 enumerated powers. here's a wiki link, in case you're lazy:

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enumerated_powers

  remember, of the two schools of thought, only one is correct: strict constructionism. anything
  else implies that, by way of reasoning, the federal government may take actions not strictly
  allowed depending on how text is interpreted.... if this is true, then Article 1 Section 8 holds
  no power and the government is to do as it wills which is obviously not true.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/06/10(Mon)22:39 No.

  I could give a shit less about the message, but I just loaded up this and watched >>1366567 and I
  fucking came buckets.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/06/10(Mon)22:41 No.

  inb4 glenn beck

>> [_] Anonymous 09/06/10(Mon)23:18 No.

  Same could be said of big business: the alternate type of government, which no one seems to
  acknowledge. They also have a long history of exploitation, safety violations, and corruption.
  Restricting federal ability to enforce responsibility and split up unreasonable concentrations of
  power and property, are deleterious to this same philosophy.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/06/10(Mon)23:20 No.

  >>1366651
  >the only ones who would question it have their own motives or viewpoints as to how the world
  should be. they want to use whatever force needed to accomplish their goals.

  >we don't need to listen to or consider any counterpoint, because they are THE ENEMY, because
  THEY DISAGREE.
  Fixed.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/06/10(Mon)23:25 No.

  >>1366671
  Haha, that's how I read it too

>> [_] Anonymous 09/06/10(Mon)23:34 No.

  >>1366671
  attaboy, anon.
  also, you all know this flash is courtesy of a libertarian group, right?

>> [_] Anonymous 09/06/10(Mon)23:43 No.

  The maker of that flash has obviously never heard of the Social Contract.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/07/10(Tue)00:07 No.

  Liberty sounds painful now

>> [_] Anonymous 09/07/10(Tue)00:19 No.

  One could argue that acquiring resources to aid in prosperity, is to value nature in lower regard
  to oneself. Similar to the way one human can steal life, liberty and property, from another
  human. So can a human steal from nature. How does nature fit into this equation?
  One could even argue that humans are not excluded from nature. And so to steal from each other
  makes no difference.
  Personally, I think the philosophy of liberty, although ideal, can never be fully achieved.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/07/10(Tue)01:00 No.

  awesome i exist in the future guess i can tell the cancer doc ill b fine after all

>> [_] Anonymous 09/07/10(Tue)01:22 No.

  lets have a hypothetical situation i have a gun and am going to shoot you because i hate you the
  only way you can stop that is to kill me so you cant have your liberty without taking mine and
  vice-versa
  WHAT DO YOU DO?

>> [_] Anonymous 09/07/10(Tue)01:32 No.

  >>1366759
  you initiate, I finish.

  You have a right to protect yourself from blah blah.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/07/10(Tue)01:59 No.

  >>1366765
  so you'll shoot me after i shoot you cant see how that could possibly fail

>> [_] Anonymous 09/07/10(Tue)02:08 No.

  Made by a hippie, presumably.

>> [_] Anonymous 09/07/10(Tue)02:13 No.

  >>1366679
  And we all know libertarians are baby rapists/eaters.