Replies

"Either your "responses" didn't respond or they were so poorly written that they are not understandable."

Well, yes, I did write them for someone who is willing -and able- to read and comprehend. Obviously you don't qualify.

"You could try again to accually communicate or just keep muttering in the cave and picking the leaves outta your beard."

Good advice that you should consider taking.

"However, I would just say don't bother since you clearly don't have any idea of what you speak other than your fantasies."

ROTFLMAO! The only one that doesn't have any idea of what they are talking about is you.
You cannot respond to the points brought up and you cannot defend your position.
(Granted, being an apologist for big-government isn't easy, and it is hard on the stomach.)
Instead you come up with crap like this. You are really, really lame...

"Study some history, political philosophy and economics and then we might talk."

I doubt it, obviously the conversation is already beyond your capabilities.

"At present my dealing with gibberish quotient is filled."

I guess that means you won't be posting anymore. (sigh of relief heard throughout the forum)
Really, your arrogance is badly misplaced. You may be a legend in your own mind, but so far you've come across as a buffoon.
A pathetic buffoon at that...

"We must look beyond our individual self (and even self interest) when making decisions that affect society as a whole."

Spoken as a true socialist (collectivist/communist).
You can wiggle all you want to, but you have shown your true colors, you just don't have the guts to admit what your position really is.
Your statement is one that's used by every socialist do-gooder that works to undermine the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It's been used by every socialist/communist government that has ever come into existance to justify the things that they have done to the citizens in their countries.
I'll stick with the concept that, by protecting the rights of the individual, the rights of the group are protected as well. It's what the "American way" is supposed to be about. You can keep your "for the good of society" noise. It might fly in a university setting (or down at the local teacher's union meetings) but then, that IS the hotbed of liberalism...they are suckers for that kind of feel-good junk logic. The kids don't know any better and the profs believe their own PR. I'd guess that's why so many of them are clinton-supporting democrats. They like the idea of taxing all to pay for benefits for a few...and ultimatly covering their paychecks.

It's easy to see why those types promote socialism, nursing on the government teat tends to destroy self-pride and makes the sucker tend to hate the individual whose success hasn't come from that government-supported paycheck. They want EVERYBODY to be down at their level. What they refuse to acknowledge is that, ultimatly, someone has to produce to pay the bills. Individuals producing for themselves are far more willing to work than socialist slaves that work for the "good of society". Individuals have made our country great, not bureaucrats in government offices (although some like to claim otherwise). Our success is in spite of the government drones, not because of them. Our founding fathers knew this. That is why they setup a minimalist government. Unfortunatly bureaucrats tend to promote more bureaucracy. The "for the good of society" argument is how they have gotten away with it. We have plenty of examples of how that eventually turns out.
It isn't pretty.