[Protagoras]

This agrees with the "in my own words" definition I provided above.

LOL,,good stuff. First you climb on to a high horse and scold me in a derisive manner for not using a real definition, and then when I provide one and it proves me correct, and you incorrect, you switch high horses and admit you never looked it up and that it means what you think it should so it fits your mistake. LOL

You should do stand up comedy.

And your bizzarro world of up is down and freedom is totalitarianism would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

[little jeremiah]

Nope, my in-my-own words definition of "theocracy" was one I remembered from another dictionary. Then I quoted Webster's which supported my first definition.

You (as most "liberaltarians" I have attempted to debate with) cannot debate fairly; meaning cannot debate using facts and evidence.
All you can do is juggle words, name-call, and spout slogans and libertarian cant. Just like the "liberals" you claim to be so different from. Besmirch the messenger ("Taliban", etc) but as usual, libertarians (as befits of one of the many brands of utopians) cannot debate facts. The conversation quickly degrades into your side name calling, innuendo, belittling, and so on.

Come up with some reasoned debate or go back to your bong.

And if you don't like that kind of argument, stop using that kind of argument.