Posted on 02/15/2002 6:50:19 AM PST by DoSomethingAboutIt
Amen!
Liar.
I used to live in the People's Socialist Republik of Taxachusetts, but I moved to rural Florida, so I could hobnob amongst drunken bikers in peace.
New Hampshire was a possibility, but it's too cold there and was being polluted by Massholes such as myself who had already ruined their own state.
Regards.
Taint so. The medium doesn't put forth that message. --- And we can't read your self centered mind.
Let's ask him then, shall we? Freeeee, did you take my post to you in #166 the wrong way, or did you grasp it's humorous intent?
Then your imitation is excellent.
If you force someone to employ or rent a person because of that person's race, people are not equal before the law.
If you refuse employment or tenancy to certain racial groups, you're engaged in illegal racist practices.
LOL!!! DemocRats respect nothing but communities and groups -- hence, their various flavors of identity politics.
Yup. (See my post #75. "And we don't apologize!")
(Just to put it into context, Libertarians want to force their will on others, too: no force, no fraud. If I wanted to be fraudulent, I might accuse you of using force to keep me from being fraudulent. Or from initiating force. In fact, this is what Liberals do!)
Really? So they respect the boy scouts? Do they respect my community that does not wish to allow gay marriages? Do they respect my state when our head Justice said that homosexuals are deviants and should not be allowed to have children?
You don't troll, and haven't made personal attacks against me, and have plenty of logic in your replies, rather than just plain old emotionalism, remniscent of liberals that is all too common here.
Which is quite a refreshing change I must say, from some other people I won't mention. I wish those other people would come up with some new witty remarks, because being called a druggie gets pretty old.
What are you talking about? Every city with more than a few thousand inhabitants has fairly clear residential, commercial, etc. regions (either through government-imposed zoning or through natural development) with markedly different standards of normal activities and construction.
Then your imitation is excellent.
Now if you say you're not a Liberal, I'll say your imitation is excellent! ;-)
I am White, but I have never ever hated or even disliked anyone because he wasn't White. And I don't think I'll ever choose to employ a White person if there is a better-suited Black candidate for the job. Unless, of course, it is illegal for me to employ the Black guy. And that's just what your favorite law says, only with the colors swapped!
Does the state have the power to take away his kids?
Really? Mind quoting it?
A-ha, so you admit you hate women who aren't white. Just kidding :-)
Really? Mind quoting it?
I don't know the exact language of the law (luckily, I needn't--I'm not an American). Perhaps it doesn't mention colors. But it was passed by Liberals to discriminate against Whites, and it is used by Liberals to discriminate against Whites. And to hurt the economy.
To approach the matter from another direction, do you support laws against refusing to employ ugly (pardon me, aesthetically challenged) women (sorry: persons) as stewardesses (oops ... flight attendants)?
Weaken the grip of the law, return responsibility to the individual, and watch people as a whole, correct most of the things I am sure you think of as wrong. You, or God, cannot make people more loving or moral by enforcing laws. It makes moral wrongs, become conflicts with the law. When govt takes the hobbles off of the economic horse, the economy soars, if they would take the chains off of the individual, morality will be in vogue again.
Libertarians say that it is immoral to initiate force or fraud. I agree with this, with a little change: "it is immoral to initiate force other than in order to enforce morality." (Without this amendment, you couldn't use force to stop fraud.)
But the problem is, the Liberals would not agree to it when it did not suit them! You know how irrational they can get. They would call you immoral, claiming that you wanted to force your morality on them.
This is to make the point that there is no such thing as absolute morality. There is no morality that everyone agrees on. I wish there were, but there isn't. Morality is determined by ... oh, I hate to say this ... the majority. Too bad!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.