Miltamec Soundsquinaez

I think what The Unfan is saying is that conservatives don't want other people to embrace you, if you're an a.sshole. Right?
Anyway, my thought on this is that most conservatives like to see themselves as authoritarian, or in a powerful role in somehow, and generally I don't think they like people to think outside of their little close-minded box. Just my thoughts.

cardboard adolescent

because otherwise we've got widespread social conflicts
that's why these laws were passed in the first place

The Unfan

...or it wouldn't. Though all of either of us have is speculation.

cardboard adolescent

... we have historical basis? as i pointed out before, laws don't get made for no reason.

The Unfan

I can't think of a rational reason to outlaw marijuana and not alcohol. While both are mind altering drugs alcohol is actually far more dangerous while marijuana has medical benefits such as ease of pain, increase in appetite, and the surpressing of vomit. Marijuana realistically isn't a bad way to treat bulemia.

The first ammendment was made to protect unpopular speech, not popular speech. You have the right to choose if something offends you or not, but not the right to take away someone else's rights based on how offended something makes you. You can react to it, sure. I agree that you should be able to down talk any stance you want, and ridicule those who disagree with you. Make your point and if its convincing enough someone might change their stance or retract their statement. No government interaction necesary. We're all offended by some things and that is a good thing. Taking away individuality based on what offends you personally just isn't good (subjectively speaking of course) for society as a whole.


In recent history I've not been censored.

cardboard adolescent

There's still a reason it's illegal, but it's a bad reason and not based on historical precedent or clinical studies, more social prejudices and tobacco lobyists. For something like anti-discrimination laws, there is a valid historical precedent.

The Unfan

Expand? I'm just curious as to if your understanding differs from mine or if I missed something in history class.

tkpb938

Hmmm how about the whole thing with african-americans being enslaved by white folk....

TheBig3

And funny you should mention that. Know who else doesn't agree with that? Libratarians, Aranchists, or Conservatives. Read something about William F Buckley and get back to me. Unless of course he's only a quasi-conservative or whatever the hell it is you use to save face.


And not so you could hop on the public airwaves and be shocking because you're attention starved. it was politiclly motivated to give equality to people who were under the persecution of government rule. Not to throw Bologna at a strippers ass.


Maybe we ought to ban you and make the damn thread more relevent.

__________________
I've moved to a new address

The Unfan

Senior or junior? I don't know much about what senior's stances were but junior is for the legalization of drugs despite being originally against it. Aside from that I don't really know his reasoning.



I'm pretty sure that was meant to be protected. It is just speech after all.




They openly traded themselves to us. We may have captured a few, and I'll agree to that being horrible. However, for the most part they dealt with slave trading too, so to pin it on the white man is completely unfair. As far as slavery goes, it is only bad because and if it goes against the choice of the slave. If the slave has no problem with the slave/master relationship than I don't view it as bad.