Trade

[EveronVetsAgainstTheWar 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

I don't agree with that at all. The desire to live is much more basic and fundamental then the so called 'civil liberties'.<span id='postcolor'>

I don't really understand what you're trying to say. Could you put it another way for me?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">That goes for today too. How meaningful is for example the right to vote when you have two parties and less then 50% of the people choose to vote, like in USA.<span id='postcolor'>

Are you saying that since half the people don't vote, that we shouldn't vote at all?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Do you consider your current goverment oppressive?<span id='postcolor'>

No, no, and no. I am very thankful for being born here and living here. I do think however that sometimes laws are enacted that could lead eventually to an oppressive government. I also think our Constitution has kept America from an oppressive government.

[Guest]

Sorry for my last post, I was in a bit of a hurry so I didn't write what I intended to and it became a bit fuzzy.

First of all we are clearly talking about different things. I am looking at the development of the society on the long term while you are talking about the current political situation.

My whole point of debating the civil liberties on the long run was connected to the fact that the core of your political system, the constitution is unchangable. That will at some point cause problems.

Second, I think that we must separate civil liberties from human rights. Those two are very different things. The right to life is a human right and not a civil liberty. The right to free speech is a civil liberty and not a human rights. A human right is a basic universal prequisite for survival. A civil liberty is a right given by a social and political agreement. The human rights are global and universal while the civil liberties are arbitrary, and dependent on the system they are defined in.

My point was that clinging on to the civil liberties like they were something holy and universal is wrong. History has shown how many such arbitrary 'rights' in different systems have been removed and are today considered as insane.

[EveronVetsAgainstTheWar 1]

I understand now. And indeed we are talking of completely different things. I used to believe in communism after doing some research on it (who knew communism was supposed to be a good thing! but eventually I realized that I was assuming eventually everyone would be good and that the system would work and we would all be happy. And then I realized I would be dead. And there's no garuntee it'll happen. So yes, I am looking out for my self-interests for now. Not for 100 years from now. Just my freedom.

And I must say this is probably the most intelligent conversation I have ever been in on this forum. It didn't turn into "you're a moron" or "go back to school, idiot". I thank you for discussing this with me in a civilized manner and I think that we have both learned that we value different things. You value civilization in the long run, I value my freedom now.

[FetishFool 0]

I don't think that one kind of Government can lead it's country through anything:

A Communist govt is best during a Depression.

A Dictatorship is best during war-time.

A Democracy is best during peace-time.

An ideal society would be able to switch between the three.  But that kind of society is idealistic, and might not be very practical.

[EveronVetsAgainstTheWar 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FetishFool @ July 05 2002,12:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A Dictatorship is best during war-time.<span id='postcolor'>

I disagree.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (residuum @ July 05 2002,18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And I must say this is probably the most intelligent conversation I have ever been in on this forum.  It didn't turn into "you're a moron" or "go back to school, idiot".  <span id='postcolor'>

I know. It's almost inappropriate for the forums. Perhaps we should throw in some ad hoc post discussion insults?

[EveronVetsAgainstTheWar 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ July 05 2002,12:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (residuum @ July 05 2002,18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And I must say this is probably the most intelligent conversation I have ever been in on this forum. It didn't turn into "you're a moron" or "go back to school, idiot". <span id='postcolor'>

I know. It's almost inappropriate for the forums. Perhaps we should throw in some ad hoc post discussion insults? <span id='postcolor'>

I concur entirely.

However you are the mod and if I were to call you an "idealist douche bag" I might get in trouble.

P.S. what do you say about giving me a new title besides "member"? I have noticed they are all the rage lately.

[Sadico 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And I must say this is probably the most intelligent conversation I have ever been in on this forum. It didn't turn into "you're a moron" or "go back to school, idiot". <span id='postcolor'>

Too bad i don't know enough English to voice my opinion

[FetishFool 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (residuum @ July 06 2002,12:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FetishFool @ July 05 2002,12:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">A Dictatorship is best during war-time.<span id='postcolor'>

I disagree.<span id='postcolor'>

A Dictatorship in the US wouldn't be much different than how the US is right now.

Pres Bush is basically dictating. But instead with bogus propoganda that most Americans eat up like candy. Then they do what ever Bush says.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (residuum @ July 05 2002,18:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">However you are the mod and if I were to call you an "idealist douche bag" I might get in trouble.

P.S. what do you say about giving me a new title besides "member"?  I have noticed they are all the rage lately.<span id='postcolor'>

Done.

[EveronVetsAgainstTheWar 1]

:'(

I cant argue with pragmatic... but maybe something a little more appropriate for the children than "douche bag".

[Cloney 0]

AL SHARPTON: WE GET SIGNAL

JESSIE JACKSON: WHAT Y'ALL SAY

BUSH: ALL YOUR RIGHTS ARE BELONG TO US!

CHENY: YOU HAVE NO TIME TO COMPLAIN MAKE YOUR RIGHTS

...

[EveronVetsAgainstTheWar 1]

I litterly just spit mountain dew onto myself reading that. I remember that video... rofl

[ralphwiggum 6]

hmm..need some insults?

Denoir, you are a load of !@#$%^&*()

Fetish, you are a load of !@#$%^&*()

Residumm, you are a load of !@#$%^&*()

All of you, you are a load of !@#$%^&*()

enough?

I tend to consider civil liberty as interpretation of human rights. They are derived from human rights to be more precise. The human rights are intrinsic properties that should not be compromised as long as one does not compromise others's.

Civil liberty can be translated into many forms. For example, human right to live. This brings interesting topic regarding death penalty. Let's say someone DID kill another person and acknowledges that he did it while he was sane. Then would executing him appropriate?

From pro-penalty perspective, it would show that since the criminal killed his victim, the criminal violated the victim's human rights. and thus the criminal does not deserve his rights, so killing him would be not inappropriate.

from Pro-life perspective, it would show that even though criminal deserves punishment, his human rights are intrinsic, and since execution of him won't make difference to victim's status, execution is not appropriate form of repatriation.

this pretty much shows that difference in how they view civil liberty is differnce in how they interprete intrinsic human rights.

Does US constitution work similarly? i think so. you have a constitution and then amendments. amendments can be made and amended should the society feel it needs to do so. if 66% of pppl think the change is neccessary, they will change it. but considering 66% of population is a big number, this would indicate that such conviction of population is hugh, and is warranted.

I don't know how outsiders view US, but all they see is news of John Ashcroft says this and that and so forth. In commoner's life, that really doesn't mean much. I really don't give a damn if Ashcroft gives out warning. My life has not changed since 9/11 except that I watch TV less after seeing so many dumb journalists running around like a headless chicken.(just realized that most are headless chickens anyway) It seems that outsiders think US is one coherent group that idiotically follows whatever that monkey-wannabe in the Whitehouse is saying. unfortunately, those warnings don't mean much to ppl here.

[EveronVetsAgainstTheWar 1]

It's not the warning Ashcroft is famous for.  It's his ideas of the Government should be expanded, your rights should be stripped, in the interest of national security.

And your life has changed. You do realize that post 9/11 Bush made this "war on terror" thing where he's spending billions of dollars to bomb the hell out of a desolate place no one cares about? That this "conservative" has expanded the government making a WHOLE NEW AGENCY called the deperatment of "Homeland Security" where YOUR tax dollars are going just to increase pointless beauracracy? And he's still got 2 years left.

[Cloney 0]

I want a Title Too

... But I might get a title Like "Communist Asslicker"... Not Good. Oh well I'll take my chances.

[ralphwiggum 6]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (residuum @ July 05 2002,21:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It's not the warning Ashcroft is famous for.  It's his ideas of the Government should be expanded, your rights should be stripped, in the interest of national security.

And your life has changed.  You do realize that post 9/11 Bush made this "war on terror" thing where he's spending billions of dollars to bomb the hell out of a desolate place no one cares about?  That this "conservative" has expanded the government making a WHOLE NEW AGENCY called the deperatment of "Homeland Security" where YOUR tax dollars are going just to increase pointless beauracracy?  And he's still got 2 years left.   <span id='postcolor'>

exactly.

that's why i don't like Republicans. They always say that gov't should be kept minimum, but when things like this happens, they start expanding like crazy.

And our projected budget surplus has been demolished thanx to Bush's idiotic tax refund plan. Should we still have that money, I think US could afford some decent planning resource.

[EveronVetsAgainstTheWar 1]

Bush is spending money he doesn't have.

[FetishFool 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (residuum @ July 06 2002,18:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Bush is spending money he doesn't have.<span id='postcolor'>

US National Debt Clock