Bushisms (humor) - DPChallenge Forums

Peleng 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye MC In M42 Mount

12/16/2005 10:28:46 AM · #51

Damn symantecs....

Liberal
- USA: advocate free lifestyles and immense government influence in daily life and strong socialist tendencies. Essentially, the government knows better than you philosophy
- UK: apparently, free market, small government (or what is commonly called Libertarian in the USA)

[Note, LB, you should express yourself as a Libertarian when dealing with Americans instead of a Liberal. They'll get a better idea of your stance then.]

Conservative
- USA: small government, small taxes, government mainly for foriegn issues (trade, diplomacy, defense)
- UK: makes people think neo-NAZI

National Socialist
- USA: makes people think neo-NAZI

As for me, I have realized that I am a "Libertarian Communist", this means I support libertarianism, in that we should be free to live so long as we don't infringe on another. (This get's blurry, as you must define "another" hence the abortion debate.) At the same time, I believe in helping people, and I believe in a system of shared furtherance of the common good. (Communism) However, I believe one must opt into communism, and not have it forced upon them. But anyone who does opt in and contribute according to their means will receive the communal support and benefit. And then if feasible, we might assist others outside the communal pact in hopes of having them see the benefits and becoming a contributor.

Matthew

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

12/16/2005 10:56:26 AM · #52

Originally posted by theSaj:

Conservative
- USA: small government, small taxes, government mainly for foriegn issues (trade, diplomacy, defense)
- UK: makes people think neo-NAZI

In the UK the Conservative party is centre-right, and conservatism is generally associated with them, rather than ultra-right wing (which is better labelled fascism). Both Conservative (right wing) and Labour (lef wing) parties are converging on policy with centrist policies. The third "centre" party, the Liberal Democrats, are being squeezed and are being forced into adopting some left wing policies as a means to differentiate their policies.

12/16/2005 11:50:00 AM · #53

Originally posted by theSaj:

As for me, I have realized that I am a "Libertarian Communist", this means I support libertarianism, in that we should be free to live so long as we don't infringe on another. (This get's blurry, as you must define "another" hence the abortion debate.) At the same time, I believe in helping people, and I believe in a system of shared furtherance of the common good. (Communism) However, I believe one must opt into communism, and not have it forced upon them. But anyone who does opt in and contribute according to their means will receive the communal support and benefit. And then if feasible, we might assist others outside the communal pact in hopes of having them see the benefits and becoming a contributor.

Libertarianism = df

theSaj,

Your abortion position seems to be at odds with a Libertarian's viewpoint, except that you argue for the unborn child as though it were a full member of society. You may believe that to be the case for you, and as a Libertarian you would make that as a personal/individual choice, but not impose that view on others, as it would be their personal/individual choice to make.

I have long believed myself a part of the Libertarian political spectrum and was one of 2 people in Michigan that voted for Andre Moreau for President the year that Clinton first won the Presidency. It was 8 years of Clinton and the subsequent erosion of military morale (even Colin Powell refused to serve under Clinton - as in left the military and refused an administrative position) that convinced me that even though my politics are aligned with the Libertarians, my votes would most often go Republican. I tend to vote issues and support both major parties, however on the issues I'm most concerned with, the Republicans/Conservatives typically get the nod.

I am a staunch believer in individual responsibility and individual choice. I believe in charity and the volunteering of one's time and money to help those less fortunate. I do not believe it is in societies interest to have social dependency programs that are the tentacles of government, mandating who, what, where, when and why. I am strongly opposed to the waste of my tax dollars on "pork barrell" spending initives and believe that limited government is best, when it is truly limited. I have faith in my fellow man to make decisions for themselves, and perfer that they allow me to make mine. Regarding Tookie Williams, he paid the price for his choices as I would expect the same from me if I had made or ever make the same choices. It is called individual responsibility for individual choices. Alot like Libertarianism.

12/16/2005 11:58:25 AM · #54

Originally posted by "Flash":

Your abortion position seems to be at odds with a Libertarian's viewpoint, except that you argue for the unborn child as though it were a full member of society. You may believe that to be the case for you, and as a Libertarian you would make that as a personal/individual choice, but not impose that view on others, as it would be their personal/individual choice to make.

Not really...

"Specifically, libertarian politics holds that a person's freedom to dispose of his body and private property as he sees fit should be unlimited as long as that person does not initiate coercion on the person or property of others. Libertarians define "coercion" as the use of physical force, the threat of such, or deception (fraud), that alters, or is intended to alter, the way individuals would use their body or property."

Nor do I see abortion as a victimless crime.

"Thus, they oppose the idea of government intervening in private affairs to forcibly prevent peaceful "victimless crimes.""

12/16/2005 12:06:59 PM · #55

Originally posted by theSaj:

I suspected your position to be this and thus added in my above post:

Originally posted by Flash:

except that you argue for the unborn child as though it were a full member of society

However, as legalbeagle has asserted, it truly depends at what point ones defines life. You obviously define life while within the mother and have posted positions regarding nuerons firing. As a Libertarian, per my understanding, that is an individual choice/responsibility and thusly a choice for each to make for themselves.

Peleng 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye MC In M42 Mount

12/16/2005 12:57:20 PM · #56

"that is an individual choice/responsibility"

Actually it's not...that is one of the fundamental issues we deal with in society. An individual does not have the right to determine whether another human being constitutes and individual. Every time we've made that decision we have ended in horror. To do so, is to infringe on another's life. Thus is very sancrosanct in regards to Libertarianism.

Matthew

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

12/16/2005 01:38:17 PM · #57

Originally posted by theSaj:

Is mitochondrial DNA another human being?

Is a single cell?

First non-stem cell?

Etc etc - as Flash says, it depends on how you interpret something else as being a human being.

12/16/2005 01:39:12 PM · #58

Originally posted by theSaj:

Your sentence; "An individual does not have the right to determine whether another human being constitutes an individual." is the crux of the debate between you and I (and I believe legalbeagle as well). It is true as you state that; "An individual does not have the right to determine whether another human being constitutes an individual.", as long as that other individual is in fact an individual. Your definition of when life starts (human being=df) versus another's definition of when life starts (human being=df) is a separate argument from the Libertarian's view of "An individual does not have the right to determine whether another human being constitutes an individual", as it is written in the link post. However, I grant that some Libertarian's may believe (as you do) that the "individual/human being" is "in effect" at the point of conception, I argue that others would believe that the "individual/human being" is "in effect" at birth. Thus, your position of "An individual does not have the right to determine whether another human being constitutes an individual" as it relates to the abortion question, is not a Libertarian viewpoint, nor a Communist viewpoint, but rather a personal viewpoint. One that I respect, but am not prepared to enforce against another, specifically regarding an unborn. I understand your arguments for your position. I understand the morality of your position. I simply believe that the choice is individual, when it applies to the unborn. This I believe is more attuned to a Libertarian's politics.

Peleng 8mm f/3.5 Fisheye MC In M42 Mount

12/16/2005 01:51:41 PM · #59

Thus, your position of "An individual does not have the right to determine whether another human being constitutes an individual" (let me phrase this a little more clearly by adding that a determine that a human being does not constitute an individual)

Libertarianism does not say (Go Godwin Go) that NAZI's could kill Jews and no issue of objection could be raised. Because Libertarianism does not support one's rights against another's well being.

Abortion is a tough case because defining "another" is under great question and debate and opinion.

If the fetus is "another" than Libertarianism would say the mother could not exterminate the fetus' life.

If it is not "another" than Libertarianism would say that I could not dictate the mother's actions.

Libertarianism in no way makes any statement regards to whether or not a fetus is "another human being". The Libertarian view determines how to proceed regarding human beings and does not define human being. Which is the crux of the issue at hand with abortion.

Originally posted by "flash":

One that I respect, but am not prepared to enforce against another

But one you are okay with allowing another enforce upon a 3rd party?

Originally posted by "flash":

I simply believe that the choice is individual, when it applies to the unborn.

Which individual....is there one or two individuals at hand? if there is one, than I agree with you...if there are two, than I greatly disagree with you. I am of the belief that for most abortions there are two individuals.

Originally posted by "flash":

This I believe is more attuned to a Libertarian's politics.

There is very little relation of Libertarian viewpoint one way or the other because all the necessary facts do not exist to apply it too.

Matthew

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

12/16/2005 02:00:11 PM · #60

I don't know how exactly "Libertarian" actually equates with the concept of "liberal" ex-US, but from Wikipedia:

Liberalism:
"Cultural liberalism generally opposes government regulation of gambling, sex, prostitution, the age of consent, abortion, birth control, terminal illness, alcohol, and marijuana and other controlled substances. Most liberals oppose some or all government intervention in these areas. The Netherlands, in this respect, may be the most liberal country in the world today."

Libertarianism seems quite a lot more US-centric, and tends more twards being a political system rather than a description of political attitude:

"Libertarian perspectives on abortion: The abortion debate among libertarians centers around whether the fetus is a person (and thus has its own rights) or a part of the mother's body (in which case it is subject to her wishes). A secondary controversy is the role of the state in regulating abortion, if it is in fact immoral. Most on both sides of this debate agree that this should be settled by the states instead of the federal government, thereby invalidating Roe v. Wade on grounds that the federal government violates traditional state self-police powers. Libertarians who are not states-rights advocates, on the other hand, prefer for the issue to be settled at whatever level of government (or no level of government, if they are anarcho-capitalists) will reach the best decision. "