On the issue of Free Speech

[Unarmed Gunman]

Physical force is what I am talking about.


Of course it is.

So then your original definition of "immoral" (initiation of force - unwanted physical contact against person or property) is inconsistent with your most recent stated position that theft without physical force is also immoral...?

My position is that your original definition of immoral is incorrect, and that your amended definition including the immorality of theft is the one I would prefer.

I just want to be clear that I understand what you mean when you say something is more or less moral than something else.

 

[guerilla]

So then your original definition of "immoral" (initiation of force - unwanted physical contact against person or property) is inconsistent with your most recent stated position that theft without physical force is also immoral...?

No it is not.

 

[Unarmed Gunman]

No it is not.

Yes, it is.

Define "immoral".

The initiation of force.

Define "force".

Unwanted physical contact against person or property.

Is theft immoral, even if physical force isn't used?

Of course it is.

Either immorality is constrained to your original definition involving only the initiation of physical force, or there are immoral acts that do not necessarily involve the initiation of physical force. Not both.

Unless of course you have some more words you'd like to define in order to make your contradictory definitions compatible...

 

[emp]

Hmmm... There are two sides of this:

One - Free speech is good, and it is hardest when that speech goes against your own beliefs.

Two- There are types of "speech" that are not free. As pointed out before, free speech can be limited by the owner of the property. It can also be limited when it is aimed at hurting another person - the right to remain unharmed is above your right to free speech. This is where laws against racism, slander, etc.. come from.

As for this forum:
Racism is against the forum rules. That Dresden is still unbanned boggles my mind. (I brought it up internally and was met with shrugs and blank stares)

But I have something in mind for him that will go well with your free speech idea.

::emp::

 

[guerilla]

Yes, it is.

No it isn't.

Re-read what you quoted from me. The answer is there.

This line of discussion is really pedantic, and I am tempted to go back to ignoring you if you don't make a point. Is there a point?

 

[guerilla]

It can also be limited when it is aimed at hurting another person - the right to remain unharmed is above your right to free speech. This is where laws against racism, slander, etc.. come from.

Those laws are, for the most part, nonsense.

That Dresden is still unbanned boggles my mind. (I brought it up internally and was met with shrugs and blank stares)

Because culturally, racism has been acceptable here for a long time. I'm not saying it is right or wrong, but if you're remotely familiar with the WF norms, you gotta know he isn't the first, nor will he be the last.

 

[jonas33h]

Hmmm... There are two sides of this:

One - Free speech is good, and it is hardest when that speech goes against your own beliefs.

Two- There are types of "speech" that are not free. As pointed out before, free speech can be limited by the owner of the property. It can also be limited when it is aimed at hurting another person - the right to remain unharmed is above your right to free speech. This is where laws against racism, slander, etc.. come from.

As for this forum:
Racism is against the forum rules. That Dresden is still unbanned boggles my mind. (I brought it up internally and was met with shrugs and blank stares)

But I have something in mind for him that will go well with your free speech idea.

::emp::

I think his viewpoints are backwards but I don't think he has directly come out and attacked anyone peronally. . .( I don't follow his every post I could be wrong) so why would you want to ban him? You don't see the humor in his white people have pure blood psycho babble?

1 vote to keep him even though you already said the other mods don't care to ban him.

 

[Unarmed Gunman]

No it isn't.

Re-read what you quoted from me. The answer is there.

OK. So for something to be immoral there has to be physical force involved, except when there isn't. Got it.

You can't expect people to have an intelligent discussion with you when you choose to use your own private version of the English language.

This line of discussion is really pedantic, and I am tempted to go back to ignoring you if you don't make a point.

Oh shit, no, please don't...

What would I do?

Where else will I get regurgitated Rothbard from?

Is there a point?

I already made it. It's in there if you look closely.

 

[ly2 from WF]

Hmmm... There are two sides of this:

One - Free speech is good, and it is hardest when that speech goes against your own beliefs.

Two- There are types of "speech" that are not free. As pointed out before, free speech can be limited by the owner of the property. It can also be limited when it is aimed at hurting another person - the right to remain unharmed is above your right to free speech. This is where laws against racism, slander, etc.. come from.

As for this forum:
Racism is against the forum rules. That Dresden is still unbanned boggles my mind. (I brought it up internally and was met with shrugs and blank stares)

But I have something in mind for him that will go well with your free speech idea.

::emp::

Jon and Dresden play footsies in Skype chat. One minute Dresden is talking about gassing Jews, next minute him and Jon are going back and fourth like an old married couple. I think they secretly like each other but don't tell Dresden's stormfront buddies or they may banish him from the community for befriending the enemy Jew.

 

[guerilla]

OK. So for something to be immoral there has to be physical force involved, except when there isn't. Got it.

Force has to be initiated.

You can't expect people to have an intelligent discussion with you when you choose to use your own private version of the English language.

I've played along with your pointless exercise thus far. This claim is patently bullshit.

Oh shit, no, please don't...

What would I do?

Where else will I get regurgitated Rothbard from?

I have read very little Rothbard. I am more likely to regurgitate Karl Marx than I am Rothbard. But then, you OBVIOUSLY know what you're talking about, lol.

I do love when you try to post smarter than you are though. That's some genuinely funny shit.

I already made it. It's in there if you look closely.

Don't see it. What was your point?

 

[Unarmed Gunman]

Force has to be initiated.

I've played along with your pointless exercise thus far. This claim is patently bullshit.

I have read very little Rothbard. I am more likely to regurgitate Karl Marx than I am Rothbard. But then, you OBVIOUSLY know what you're talking about, lol.

I do love when you try to post smarter than you are though. That's some genuinely funny shit.

Don't see it. What was your point?

You hide behind semantics, everybody on this forum knows it but you. Numerous people have pointed it out to you but your nose is so far up your own ass you don't see it.

So for shits and giggles, I just turned your own tactics on you. I was bet $1 on Skype that I wouldn't do it. It's hard for me to turn down a $1 bet. My next Faygo is on you, so thanks.

 

[WildGunner]

Interesting opinions being expressed. Along with some high level "trolling". "Definitions" are out there though for those who want to find and take the time to understand them...

 

[mimoza3]

@guerilla - even though i do enjoy your constant efforts to define and expand the understanding of the meaning of words and the semantics used in the discussion this is now turning into a sort of digging that will probably end only with a "cogito ergo sum", a soft of reductionism that minimizes focus rather than expand it.

Your opposition to what can only be called "general establishment" is actually very interesting, I think you will do better service to your idea by letting go of the childish word playing and focus on stating your mind.

 

[ly2 from WF]

Interesting opinions being expressed. Along with some high level "trolling". "Definitions" are out there though for those who want to find and take the time to understand them...

Define "time".

Guerilla has created a new WF meme.

 

[johnmatrix]

What guerilla doesn't realise.

Is.

All he is doing.

Is alienating everyone.

From his cause.

 

[Philip P]

*pages suddenly_tits*

 

[guerilla]

You hide behind semantics, everybody on this forum knows it but you.

You can call it whatever you want. Your opinion doesn't register on my meter.

Numerous people have pointed it out to you but your nose is so far up your own ass you don't see it.

People who personalize discourse usually don't have an argument.

So for shits and giggles, I just turned your own tactics on you. I was bet $1 on Skype that I wouldn't do it. It's hard for me to turn down a $1 bet. My next Faygo is on you, so thanks.

You didn't actually turn my tactics on me, because I didn't contradict myself. I am happy you made a $1 today though, it's good for guys like you to make a little money online from time to time.

As a side note, even if I had contradicted myself, I don't see how that is relevant at all. I have never claimed to be perfect. I'm the last person who would say I am.

 

[guerilla]

Your opposition to what can only be called "general establishment" is actually very interesting, I think you will do better service to your idea by letting go of the childish word playing and focus on stating your mind.

I have already explained that what most of you consider rights are probably better called privileges.

Guerilla has created a new WF meme.

It's like monkeys on typewriters, but maybe that's an improvement around here.

What guerilla doesn't realise.

Is.

All he is doing.

Is alienating everyone.

From his cause.

I don't have a cause, and if you thought I did, then you really don't get it.

 

[mimoza3]

I don't have a cause, and if you thought I did, then you really don't get it.

See how much better this is without the word games?

 

[guerilla]

See how much better this is without the word games?

Asking people to define what it is they mean isn't a word game.