Stefan Molyneux To Ron Paul Supporters: I'm Sorry [vid]

[heavenlyboy34]

Well you can't buy dynamite in your hardware store today. We could in the 50's. Why can't you now? What are you missing?

I'm not missing anything. You're clearly missing the fact that this progressive erosion of liberty is not hindered by Constitutionalism, and is in fact condoned by it.

 

[Travlyr]

Chris adds plenty of value to the forums. He's one of my favorite posters, even when we disagree. You have tremendous difficulty in addressing what he actually says and have to resort to personal attacks like the above quote. This tells me you aren't capable of debating the subject. In formal debate, you most likely would have been declared the loser by the moderator.

Rah Rah Shish Boom Bah.

 

[Travlyr]

I'm not missing anything. You're clearly missing the fact that this progressive erosion of liberty is not hindered by Constitutionalism, and is in fact condoned by it.

Really? Quote the exact language in the Constitution that prohibits the ownership of dynamite.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

You are not a free man and you don't even know it.

Actually, I'm well aware of it. I wouldn't be here and active in the libertarian movement were that not the case. At least I'm able to recognize my slaver and work against it rather than worship it.

 

[Revolution9]

Guess what, you get to enjoy Travlyr's company on my ignore list, that's right you too have made the cut and got your very own spot!

If only that would stop you from showing up to me that would be fine. Your problem is you think I am refuting you when I am refuting the whole bogus mess of philosophies that hide facts and then make proclamations that could not possibly be made had they included all the facts. I do find your hissy fits childish though.

Rev9

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Really? Quote the exact language in the Constitution that prohibits the ownership of dynamite.

It doesn't exist. It's probably in the body of law created by congress (which the CONstitution allows). Dynamite law is generally dealt with by the states and cities. You're still not making a point, though. Unless your goal is to show that the regime expands its powers at will and the Constitution is powerless to stop it.

 

[Revolution9]

I'm over 30. I find it difficult to believe anyone over 30 could be so naive to believe in the false God of constitutionalism after being alive for more than 30 years. So we're even.

The error in this thinking is that the Constitution is looked on properly as a compact. Not a God. This is bogus rhetoric and yet you accuse Travlyr of playing gambits.

Rev9

 

[heavenlyboy34]

If only that would stop you from showing up to me that would be fine. Your problem is you think I am refuting you when I am refuting the whole bogus mess of philosophies that hide facts and then make proclamations that could not possibly be made had they included all the facts. I do find your hissy fits childish though.

Rev9

Whatever you think of his philosophy, you certainly haven't refuted it. You, like Roy L, have a habit of throwing out some fallacy or another and declaring yourself the victor. Bad form, and would cost you any formal debate.

 

[Travlyr]

Actually, I'm well aware of it. I wouldn't be here and active in the libertarian movement were that not the case. At least I'm able to recognize my slaver and work against it rather than worship it.

Heh.. heh. Give me a break. You don't have a clue what freedom is. If you can't buy dynamite in the local hardware store, if you can't board an airplane without putting your hands high in the air, if you can't drive down the road unadulterated from invasion... you are not a free man. You are a submissive.

 

[Revolution9]

Have you ever read "Democracy: The God That Failed"?

No. Democracy sucks. That is why we are in the mess we are in. (See the animal voting video posted recently). I imagine reading it would be like reading a manual on how to breath and drink water.

The stars gotta be doing some angling because most everybody who is usually on the ball is in some kind of rhetorical lala land today.

Rev9

 

[CCTelander]

I would like to be able to if I were so inclined. What does that have to do with the price of rice in China?

Nothing at all. Nor has it anything at all tyo do with ANY of the substantive points raised by others in this thread. It's just YET ANOTHER of Trav's red herrings. No big surprise there, but it IS getting a bit tiresome.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

The error in this thinking is that the Constitution is looked on properly as a compact. Not a God. This is bogus rhetoric and yet you accuse Travlyr of playing gambits.Rev9

Nonsense. The Constitution can only bind those who agreed to it (all of whom are long dead). Any scholar of law can tell you that. To the extent that you and your colleagues deify the Constitution (which is your standard practice) it is a God. (Just as rulers of antiquity and their works were deified by the ancients)

 

[CCTelander]

Chris adds plenty of value to the forums. He's one of my favorite posters, even when we disagree. You have tremendous difficulty in addressing what he actually says and have to resort to personal attacks like the above quote. This tells me you aren't capable of debating the subject. In formal debate, you most likely would have been declared the loser by the moderator.

Thanks man. Much appreciated.

 

[Travlyr]

the libertarian movement

Boys & Girls ... This cliché needs to end if you wish to be free.

 

[kylejack]

Unless you enforce it.

You think Ron Paul and other politicians can enforce the Constitution. Stefan thinks it is futile. So far it looks like Stefan's winning, because I have fewer rights than ever before.

 

[Revolution9]

Actually, I'm well aware of it. I wouldn't be here and active in the libertarian movement were that not the case. At least I'm able to recognize my slaver and work against it rather than worship it.

A document is your slaver? I don't find the same sort of relationship occurs with me. I realize it is a set of governmental ethics. If commonly accepted as understood there would be no problems. The problems are related to the subversion and misinterpretation of those words and acceptance by those who didn't do their homework and the machinations encroached on the original compact to the point where you can deem it a slaver when it is the subversion and misinterpretation of that compact by those with nefarious trajectories. Those men and women are your slavers. Not the Constitution.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

No. Democracy sucks. That is why we are in the mess we are in. (See the animal voting video posted recently). I imagine reading it would be like reading a manual on how to breath and drink water.

Again, you admit democracy could not be prevented by the "chains" of Constitutionalism, but insist that Constitutionalism works. This is a type of Cognitive Dissonance.

The stars gotta be doing some angling because most everybody who is usually on the ball is in some kind of rhetorical lala land today.

Rev9

I agree. I hope you'll come back from that fabled land to have rational discourse with us soon.

 

[heavenlyboy34]

Boys & Girls ... This cliché needs to end if you wish to be free.

BS. There's nothing cliche about it. Its so rational that Constitutionalists have borrowed it and bastardized it into "the Liberty Movement".

 

[Travlyr]

Nonsense. The Constitution can only bind those who agreed to it (all of whom are long dead). Any scholar of law can tell you that. To the extent that you and your colleagues deify the Constitution (which is your standard practice) it is a God. (Just as rulers of antiquity and their works were deified by the ancients)

Bind? Re-read the constitution. Be honest you have never read it.. have you?

 

[Revolution9]

You think Ron Paul and other politicians can enforce the Constitution. Stefan thinks it is futile. So far it looks like Stefan's winning, because I have fewer rights than ever before.

Stefan looked at a pig's arse and proclaimed there was an asshole there. I am not impressed. He did nothing to address the rest of the pig nor the barnyard. He just proclaimed it was there and stunk. He mentioned nothing of the digestive processes bringing about that stench. Nor pork bellies, sunday roasts, the breed of pig nor it's lineage. He basically obfuscated everything about the pig except it's arsehole and proclaimed that to be the pig. He is really good at that type of rhetoric and I am jusy handy as a dandy in spotting it.

Rev9