Deep South Freedom

[Samson_Corwell]

@conan

You’re saying I don’t have that right. I see it as a infringement on my right. The goverment has taken sides.

Yes, it has. And you want it to take your side.

@conan

Goverment must remain neutral.

Metaphysically impossible.

[SimplyTrying]

@conan

John Locke was one one of greatest liberals of his time. Now libs piss on his grave.

That would really upset the caretakers of Christ Church Cathedral in Oxford England. They don’t like people urinating on the tiles.

[conan]

@Eclipze

Best let law enforcement do what you pay your hard earned tax dollars to do. Unless you don’t trust them, of course.

Call your insurance company…and they rape you over again. So not only are you a victim of thief…but you’re also a victim of insurance scam.

But that still doesn’t solve simple fundamental right Right to life, liberty and property.

[conan]

Right…the goverment will protect you.

[sikofit]

@conan

But that still doesn’t solve simple fundamental right Right to life, liberty and property.

You just made up the last part

[Eclipze]

Find a better insurance company.

[JayJay]

@conan

My original post I said chase the thief down and put a bullet in his head. Meaning the crime is still in action.

You’re saying I don’t have that right. I see it as a infringement on my right. The goverment has taken sides.

It’s same way libs want to take away guns. Every time you take those right away what happens? It empowers those that infringes on those rights because the system/goverment protect them and not those that have their rights violated.

Goverment must remain neutral. When it doesn’t what happen Jay?

So you think you should have the right to hunt down and shoot a criminal. You really think that right is “infringed” because “government wants control”? You can’t think of another reason…a utilitarian reason?

And again I will ask…and just answer it straight up …you truly believe the government should have remained neutral when it came to dealing with a hundred plus years of blacks being systematically locked out of our economic system because “property right infringement”?

Think about what it means when you say that if that’s what you believe. Tell me how you think that anyone locked out of economic opportunity is truly free or equal

[sikofit]

@conan

Right…the goverment will protect you.

And you would still be rightfully rotting in jail for premeditated murder

[Samson_Corwell]

Oh, @conan. Are you going to address my response that your demand for neutrality is impossible meet?

[fallenturtle]

@WuWei

@fallenturtle

Let’s raise all business taxes by x amount and then give a tax credit of x amount to businesses who serve all people regardless of sex, gender, race, ability, and any other protected class.

I like it. Why raise them first?

If the goal is to encourage all businesses to not discriminate then should that goal be met it will be revenue neutral.

[conan]

@JayJay

So you think you should have the right to hunt down and shoot a criminal. You really think that right is “infringed” because “government wants control”? You can’t think of another reason…a utilitarian reason?

If the crime is still being committed…yes. Does the crime stop the moment my property is in his possession?

[Samson_Corwell]

@JayJay

@conan

My original post I said chase the thief down and put a bullet in his head. Meaning the crime is still in action.

You’re saying I don’t have that right. I see it as a infringement on my right. The goverment has taken sides.

It’s same way libs want to take away guns. Every time you take those right away what happens? It empowers those that infringes on those rights because the system/goverment protect them and not those that have their rights violated.

Goverment must remain neutral. When it doesn’t what happen Jay?

So you think you should have the right to hunt down and shoot a criminal. You really think that right is “infringed” because “government wants control”? You can’t think of another reason…a utilitarian reason?

And again I will ask…and just answer it straight up …you truly believe the government should have remained neutral when it came to dealing with a hundred plus years of blacks being systematically locked out of our economic system because “property right infringement”?

Think about what it means when you say that if that’s what you believe. Tell me how you think that anyone locked out of economic opportunity is truly free or equal

Jay, the government is not being neutral in not having PA laws. You shouldn’t accept that premise.

[Eclipze]

Well that doesn’t sound very civilized. Been watching a lot of old westerns lately?!?

[conan]

@JayJay

And again I will ask…and just answer it straight up …you truly believe the government should have remained neutral when it came to dealing with a hundred plus years of blacks being systematically locked out of our economic system because “property right infringement”?

What part about goverment must remain neutral that you don’t understand?

[conan]

Like it’s civilized now.

[LucyLou]

@conan

I understand commies think individual property is a community property.

Nope. The thief is committing a crime.

[Samson_Corwell]

@conan

@JayJay

And again I will ask…and just answer it straight up …you truly believe the government should have remained neutral when it came to dealing with a hundred plus years of blacks being systematically locked out of our economic system because “property right infringement”?

What part about goverment must remain neutral that you don’t understand?

I’m still waiting…

[sikofit]

@Samson_Corwell

Oh, @conan. Are you going to address my response that your demand for neutrality is impossible meet?

Not only is it impossible but it isn’t even what he wants. It’s not like he’s started dozens of threads hoping for Trump to stick it to liberals or anything.

“No detente”

[PurpnGold]

@conan

What part about goverment must remain neutral that you don’t understand?

Well would you look at this…

[JayJay]

@conan

@JayJay

So you think you should have the right to hunt down and shoot a criminal. You really think that right is “infringed” because “government wants control”? You can’t think of another reason…a utilitarian reason?

If the crime is still being committed…yes. Does the crime stop the moment my property is in his possession?

You just don’t want to follow the logical progression of your thinking, do you?

That’s OK…it’s not necessary to follow it.

And Samson is also right…it is impossible for government to “remain neutral” in the situations we have been talking about.

In a conflict between property rights and someone getting disenfranchised economically because of property rights, the government either upholds the property owner or the disenfranchised.

No “neutral ground” exists.