My Freedom rant. . . and everyone poops except me

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: MotherMayEye

Sorry. I don't agree with that.

There are some things you have simply because you are, and to say otherwise is to acknowledge that government does have the ultimate and arbitrary power to remove those things from you.

In this case, what you are saying is that our own government has every right to go genocidal because it arbitrates the social compact via law and can therefore decide that some groups are completely and utterly unworthy of their natural life and therefore deprive them of it and anything or everything else the state deems fit to remove.

That's not what I intended to say, if that's how you understood it. (Or rather it's a very extreme take on what I wrote.)

By agreeing to a social compact, we agree to give up some of our liberties and put limits on certain rights. That doesn't mean we are helpless to a government that might decide to 'go genocidal.' There are checks & balances (although arguably they aren't all that effective at limiting government), but they do exist. Voting is one of them.

originally posted by: Flyingclaydisk
So here's a illustrative (but hypothetical) question for y'all...

You volunteer to go on a deep space mission to another planet capable of supporting life. One other person, of the opposite sex, is also chosen. It will be a one way trip. You will be put into stasis (i.e. ageless sleep) until your craft lands on the distant planet.

One day in the future you wake up from your long sleep on the beach of a tropical paradise (I intentionally omitted any reference to Eden here). No one else is around, you are the only two inhabitants of this planet. There is no government, no society, nothing.

What are your "rights"?

The rights of the intrepid couple are as they see fit within reason, taking local flora an fauna into account and how they may impact them negatively or positively. Can't exactly trash a well-established balance if you expect to survive.

In other words, it's a day by day thing until they have the planet & it's plants and wildlife fleshed out better and kow what, if any limits are applied toward any given species of Planet XYZ.

Although they're kind of screwed if they're vegans & it's a planet of intelligent plants with their own rules and laws. Doubly screwed if it's intelligent flora AND fauna with rules & laws. Guess it'd be a lot of mea culpa going on with the idiot n00b humans there who did no prior studies and brought no food & supplies ( you DID say "no nothing", which I assume means too stupid to pack food stocks)

a reply to: DBCowboy

That sounds dangerous...

How can we possibly trust people to make their own decisions?

Someone might get hurt!!

a reply to: Liquesence

I'm only "pro-abortion" insofar as I don't have the right to deny a woman from making the choice herself, even if disagree with it.

I suppose you could count me among that group as well

I am totally opposed to turning personal feelings and belief into legislation. It is one main reason we have so many unneeded laws that penalize virtually any form of conduct imaginable

I don't particularly like my tax dollars going to drop bombs and kill innocent people overseas who have not done anything to me, either.

True, but at least warfighting is one of the few things the government should be getting involved in. Although I admit I don't particularly approve of a majority of the targets they select, as I feel we should generally stay out of things that do not threaten us a nation and a people

Valid point. The majority aren't taxpayer funded, but rather out of pocket. See the Hyde Amendment and subsequent legislation.

I was not aware of this, that is pretty interesting. Like I said I don't feel it is my place to advocate for any specific laws banning or approving the practice, and that by default it should be permissible since the law *should* stop where an individual's body begins. Government attempts to regulate such things gives the impression (quite erroneously) that the government somehow owns a person, and therefore requires its permission to undertake any specific action. I oppose government control and regulation replacing individual thought and their personal judgement (even though it is often poor judgement, the right to make mistakes is crucial to freedom).

You definitely have presented some interesting and intelligible information, true to form