Quote:
Originally Posted by boo boo
Boundries? He thinks the government has no function at all, that's a pretty big difference.
|
I am pretty sure he believes that the government does have a function. The function: to protect individual rights.
No, I am not. If you look at the definition of theocracy, it necessitates a government for a religion to rule over. If there is no government, there is no theocracy.
Quote:
|
If there's no government, people are gonna start depending on some other kind of governing body. Religion and corporations would have no restraints, they could pretty much have full reign over anything.
|
The government has no restraints, yet we still manage to live under it without being oppressed. There is, in fact, a restraint. It is the body the government rules, or the people. If a corporation did something the people really didn't like, the people could rebel and violence and chaos would control. Don't mistake me for believing this is right.
Quote:
|
He wants a non interventionist US, at the same time he doesn't mind if we remain free trade dependent and despite his reputation as a "liberal conservative" he's far from it, he's very anti separation of church and state and xenophobic.
|
Anyone who is remotely intellectual and pays attention to right-politics would know that he is more conservatives than the conservatives. I think he even said this all the time during his campaign. He wants to restore the country back to the state it had at the time of the constitution, minus the flaws like slavery.
Secondly, reading your posts is like watching a liberal faux news. You never give me any quotes or such to back up your ridiculous statements. You might as well say we never landed on the moon. You will get just as much recognition at this point. I don't ask for quotes unless you go out and call some one "xenophobic."
Secondly:
Quote:
|
He doesn't believe in a limited government, he believes in no government
|
Then:
Quote:
|
He thinks government's only function is national security (and what a sh*tty one we'd have without the CIA I might add) and enforcing a few laws based on Christian doctrine, and that's it, everything else is "up to the states".
|
Quote:
|
He thinks the government has no function at all, that's a pretty big difference.
|
It is all propaganda to me, when I read your posts.
Quote:
|
So yeah, to hell with huminatarian causes, we only care about little brown people if they make our products.
|
That is absolutely right. We don't care about people unless they are a value to us. Thanks for stating the obvious and then manipulating it so that you make a group of people look "extra greedy." Humanitarianism is a stain on humanity, just like all of the duty ethics you propose. You voluntarilly chain yourself to others and expect me to do the same with my life. You recognize the physical realm, but the spiritual (not religious) realm means nothing. You propose a system where people are paid to survive because that is what makes people happy. A little more money to pay for that kids surgery,
then he'll be closer to happiness. However, when it comes to what actually makes people happy, the self-esteem, you disregard it as if it is non-existent. Having money is a virtue to you. Having too much, a vice. Earning that money, an action that does not amount to anything. I judge that solely on your political stance, and the fact that you are so cynical (in the modern sense) when it comes to business men. You lump them all together and view them as people who tie others to machines to work long hours. However, you forget to mention the fact that you wish to tie them up to their machine too. Is their no double standard?