Who Owns You?

Then you're comfortable being owned. Fine. I'm not. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

No substantive reply. Figures.

You are advocating for a system that has never worked and will never work.

So all you can do is pout and make snarky comments, rather than explain HOW YOUR SYSTEM WOULD WORK.

Because once you start laying out the specifics, the stupidity of it becomes apparent.

How's our current system working for you? As Jefferson said, I'd rather deal with having too much liberty than too little liberty. Paraphrased. Josie is right. We HAVE to stand up and demand our rights. Personally, I think it is probably too late. But it's worth a try.

How's our current system working for you? Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Shitty. But I'm not naive enough to believe anarchy will work better. Like I said, there a plenty of places where the law is weak to non-existent and they are ALL violent, impoverished shit holes.

Or can you name a place that has eliminated government and all those pesky laws and people are flourishing?

As Jefferson said, I'd rather deal with having too much liberty than too little liberty. Paraphrased. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

And yet, Jefferson was decidedly NOT an anarchist, was he?

That's because anarchy is NOT a state of too much liberty. Quite the opposite. It is a state of the ruthless and sociopathic exploiting the weak.

We HAVE to stand up and demand our rights. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Then demand a government that protects those rights. Don't destroy government and laws thinking that will somehow defend your liberty.

Ok. Bring the government back into the confines of the Constitution, repeal the 16th and 17th Amendments, end the FED, and let's see what happens. That may be enough.

Shitty. But I'm not naive enough to believe anarchy will work better. Like I said, there a plenty of places where the law is weak to non-existent and they are ALL violent, impoverished shit holes.

Or can you name a place that has eliminated government and all those pesky laws and people are flourishing?


And yet, Jefferson was decidedly NOT an anarchist, was he?

That's because anarchy is NOT a state of too much liberty. Quite the opposite. It is a state of the ruthless and sociopathic exploiting the weak.


Then demand a government that protects those rights. Don't destroy government and laws thinking that will somehow defend your liberty. Originally Posted by ExNYer

Why are you taking it to two extremes? It's either a police-state or it's anarchy?

Why are you taking it to two extremes? It's either a police-state or it's anarchy? Originally Posted by WombRaider

?? Huh?

I never said that.

I'm pointing out that NO law - or anarchy - does NOT produce freedom. It produces poverty and terror.

I never said anything about a police state being the only alternative.

Trying to meet you in the middle, ExGYer. How about a constitutional republic based on personal freedom and individual responsibility? Where the the law only prohibits you from depriving another of their life, liberty or property by force or fraud? I will happily go there.

Also, Josie advocates not voting. I disagree. I think it is important to register a "no" vote against the system by voting third party. The larger the third party vote becomes, the more the statists will realize that we are on to their game.

My dog Daisy and my cat Sam own me. Resistance is futile. Originally Posted by SinsOfTheFlesh

Not so. You just gave up fighting for equality. Women are just as important as men, and sometimes even smarter (due to enhanced intuition). May the force be with you. . .