ELAIU: The best definition of democracy (mob rules) is 3 wolves and a sheep sitting down to discuss what's for dinner.
Another one is 51% of the people vote to hang the other 49%.
A Republic is equal protection under the law for all. Everyone's life, liberty, and property. ( at least theoretically) is protected against the mob rules mentality.
Of course this has been misinterpreted to mean that the needs of the many outweigh the individual rights. Smoking is a prime example of this. Smokers are paying huge taxes and not even given any individual liberty to smoke. Taxation without representation.....bar owners are being told that because they have clients that don't smoke that smoking will be banned by order at gun point if need be. Never mind the rights of the property owner to put up a sign that "this is a smoking establishment , if this bothers you stay out." This is socialism/democracy (mob rules). The need of the many outweigh the needs of the few or individual. Individualism is frowned upon by these wretches.
I probably screwed that up but that is the basic premise.
Oldgirl: How do you apply that to Prop 8 out in CA? The majority has voted. And now I am officially confused. As much as I want to agree with your statement, and I do, in a way, this one baffles me though. If it is good for one group, why not for the other?
Clear it up for me, please.
carvet: Unfortunately, Prop 8 is not an example worthy of analysis since it involves a group of persons that subscribe to a blasphemous life style and therefore have rendered their alleged grievance unsuitable for civil discourse.
41 comments
As I was reading the beginning of this, I was in total agreement. Then the fundies had to go and open their mouths...
Translation of Carvet's statement: "Prop 8 doesn't count, because equal rights are only important when you believe the same thing we do."
Honestly though, the one thing I can say is Oldgirl is at least showing some potential for inteligence.
"carvet: Unfortunately, Prop 8 is not an example worthy of analysis since it involves a group of persons that subscribe to a blasphemous life style and therefore have rendered their alleged grievance unsuitable for civil discourse."
Translation: fags dont deserve rights.
THIS HAS BEEN ANOTHER DISTURBING LOOK INSIDE THE MIND OF PROPOSITION 8 SUPPORTERS
I agreed with the first 85% of this. Carvet, however, is a fascist nutcase who would fit in very well in Iran.
The concept of "blasphemy" is man-made bullshit.
We have this thing called "civil rights", which was put in place to prevent the very thing you're whining about. In other words, you're babbling on about a point that was already addressed and taken care of several hundred years ago.
I like how you made you exception for cases where the people voted in favour of your opinion. Special pleading, much?
"Of course this has been misinterpreted to mean that the needs of the many outweigh the individual rights. Smoking is a prime example of this. Smokers are paying huge taxes and not even given any individual liberty to smoke. Taxation without representation.....bar owners are being told that because they have clients that don't smoke that smoking will be banned by order at gun point if need be. Never mind the rights of the property owner to put up a sign that "this is a smoking establishment , if this bothers you stay out." This is socialism/democracy (mob rules). The need of the many outweigh the needs of the few or individual. Individualism is frowned upon by these wretches. "
As someone with athsma, I cannot express my loathing for this statement in words.
Yeah, and the best definition of libertarianism is 3 wolves discussing how best to carve up the sheep for the highest bidder. And uh, who says that that property is yours? The government does, that's who.
TANSTAAFL!
Of course this has been misinterpreted to mean that the needs of the many outweigh the individual rights. Smoking is a prime example of this. Smokers are paying huge taxes and not even given any individual liberty to smoke. Taxation without representation.....bar owners are being told that because they have clients that don't smoke that smoking will be banned by order at gun point if need be. Never mind the rights of the property owner to put up a sign that "this is a smoking establishment , if this bothers you stay out.""
This sounds alright, but this sort of thing does happen in Germany - the restaurants after the smoking ban started becoming 'private clubs' which charged, say 1 euro per year for membership which meant you could go in. Private clubs could legally allow smoking on their premises, as they are private. Nearly all the restaurants in many towns have become private clubs where people go to smoke - this means that there are no non-smoking restaurants and you have to pay to go in even to smoking establishments.
"Taxation without representation"
Yeah, all those smokers without the right to vote...
Oh wait, that doesn't happen. Idiot.
Also, I LOVE the smoking ban. LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE.
It's at times like these when I start telling myself, "Hate the worldview, not the fundie."
Also, I'd assume that he thinks that governments in Muslim countries can deny Christians their rights, too. After, aren't they "blasphemers" whose rights should not be respected?
And it started off so well too...
Incidentally, is a ban on smoking in bars actually enforced at gunpoint in the US? One more reason not to go there. People in the UK in the winter tend to whinge before they go outside to smoke but that's about as argumentative as it gets. I'm just glad we don't have a gun culture over here, I wouldn't want to see a replay of 'Unforgiven' every time someone wants a B&H.
"Smoking is a prime example of this. Smokers are paying huge taxes and not even given any individual liberty to smoke. Taxation without representation.....bar owners are being told that because they have clients that don't smoke that smoking will be banned by order at gun point if need be."
Smokers have the right to not smoke, just like the rest of us, so what's the problem?
Prop 8 is unconstitutional.
I must agree with Carvet about that group of persons behind Prop 8 but I would disagree with the term "blasphemous". I hold that homophobic, delusional, hateful, and bigoted would be the more appropriate adjectives.
Blasphemy like heresy is a non-existent crime.
"Incidentally, is a ban on smoking in bars actually enforced at gunpoint in the US?"
This is a new one to me. I'm pretty sure it's just fines and stuff. There may have been one incident (which is of course oh so representative of what happens everywhere in the country *roll eyes*) that I didn't hear about or something (or pure fabrication. . .). Gunpoint would be major overkill in any case.
@Um, excuse me Mr. Spak...
FUNDIES SAY:
------------
You have the right to be straight, just like the rest of us, so what's the problem?
You have the right to be Christian/Muslim, just like the rest of us, so what's the problem?
You have the right to be Republican, just like the rest of us, so what's the problem?
No offense meant, but... don't be like them plzkthxbai.
Haeron: "This sounds alright, but this sort of thing does happen in Germany - the restaurants after the smoking ban started becoming 'private clubs' which charged, say 1 euro per year for membership which meant you could go in. Private clubs could legally allow smoking on their premises, as they are private. Nearly all the restaurants in many towns have become private clubs where people go to smoke - this means that there are no non-smoking restaurants and you have to pay to go in even to smoking establishments."
Hyperbole much? Or in other words, this is complete and utter bullshit. Changing pubs into private clubs was a mental exercise from people in Bavaria, where a lot of pub owners decried the smoking ban as the end of German culture.
Since I am actually living in a large city in Germany, I can give you the stats of local pubs turned into private clubs since the smoking ban took effect - it is exactly zero.
You know, democracy and republic are not really used in those terms anymore.
When President Bush is talking about the democracy in Iraq, does he refer to the mob rule in Iraq?
Massachusetts workplaces, including restauraunts and bars, are all smoke-free. This forces those who want one out onto the sidewalk into New England's notoriously bad weather to light up. Violators are fined or shut down by the city board of health. No one comes in with guns blazing, shooting anyone enjoying a Winston with their pizza. Sorry. You fail.
I agree with the first statement. Except it does have to do with prop8. The difference is that second hand smoke causes diseases (although I do believe a business should be able to declare itself a smoking establishment with the proper signage). Second hand gay is not contagious, in fact it does nothing but repulse idiots like these. To avoid it all you have to do is turn your head.
As a smoker, I am chafed by the fact that the feds, state, county, etc. kick me out of even the adequately ventilated covered areas and impose an ever-rising tobacco tax, but does anyone take any of that money to build appropriate weather shelters for us who are exclusively taxed? Noooo.
Bite me, oxygen breathers.
I am an ex-smoker who believes that smokers are unfairly disrimated against, not only through taxation but through being relegated to a second class status in many ways. That being said, it is a fine line to walk because now being a non-smoker I am bothered if I am sitting at a bar and someone sits next to me and starts smoking. That too is rude. I am for seperate but equal, it could work this time!
I did not even address carvet's comment becuase, clearly, he is a douchebag.
Smokers are paying huge taxes and not even given any individual liberty to smoke.
Bullshit. You can smoke in your house, your car and even in front of the grocery store, apparently. You can smoke around your kids. You can smoke in an apartment building even thought the smoke seeps under your door and into the hall and everyone else has to smell it. But yes, you are expected to be able to make it through a meal without smoking in a restaurant. And you can stop drinking for three minutes and walk outside if you want to smoke while you're at the bar.
Never mind the rights of the property owner to put up a sign that "this is a smoking establishment , if this bothers you stay out.
Now that I agree with, I think someone ought to be able to do that if they want...but it probably wouldn't happen because I think smokers are in the minority and they don't want to lose the business of the non-smokers. It's called capitalism. You remember, what GOP Jesus preaches?
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.