|
Post by mouse on Aug 12, 2010 16:47:28 GMT
Meanwhile, the liberal position is to let people be and do what they wish within the law. Yes. Outrageous, isn't it? Far better if we had the state tell us all what to be and what to do. no it isnt outrageous....but its rather stupid not to look around and see where liberalism has got us to...even liberals ought to look ahead and see the possibilities of where being OVERLY liberal can lead...so far its led us down a very dodgy road in various areas of our national life what some see as liberal others see as licence,,,,and act acordingly... Meanwhile, the liberal position is to let people be and do what they wish within the law. Liberals tolerate the intolerable because they don't have to live with the consequences. Yet the problem is in part caused by liberal values.
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Aug 12, 2010 16:50:07 GMT
Yes. Outrageous, isn't it? Far better if we had the state tell us all what to be and what to do. no it isnt outrageous....but its rather stupid not to look around and see where liberalism has got us to...even liberals ought to look ahead and see the possibilities of where being OVERLY liberal can lead...so far its led us down a very dodgy road in various areas of our national life what some see as liberal others see as licence,,,,and act acordingly... Meanwhile, the liberal position is to let people be and do what they wish within the law. Liberals tolerate the intolerable because they don't have to live with the consequences. Yet the problem is in part caused by liberal values. Mouse, What would you suggest as an alternative to people being free to do what they want within the law?? This is the stupidest conversation yet. Should we have state control? No rule of law? What is it you are suggesting as an alternative? As to where being free to do what you want within the rule of law and where it's got us; states run like this are wealthier. They have greater gender equality. They have higher literacy. They have less infant deaths. In short, none of the alternatives really have much appeal. And if that means that some people use their freedom within the law to do things that you don't approve of, tough.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 12, 2010 16:56:20 GMT
So you want censorship, that comes as no surprise, RV. Aubrey is attempting to put words into the mouths of others, did that bit pass you by for some reason? Who wants censorship? I have not suggested that people hav to be stopped saying anything, I merely want the boards stopped from being clogged up with is non stop garbage. Not the same thing. and the garbage is ???what...any thing you dont agree with.....that is censorship... just how many threads ore there on this board...enough i would have thought to suit every taste
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 12, 2010 17:19:14 GMT
no it isnt outrageous....but its rather stupid not to look around and see where liberalism has got us to...even liberals ought to look ahead and see the possibilities of where being OVERLY liberal can lead...so far its led us down a very dodgy road in various areas of our national life what some see as liberal others see as licence,,,,and act acordingly... Meanwhile, the liberal position is to let people be and do what they wish within the law. Liberals tolerate the intolerable because they don't have to live with the consequences. Yet the problem is in part caused by liberal values. Mouse, What would you suggest as an alternative to people being free to do what they want within the law?? This is the stupidest conversation yet. Should we have state control? No rule of law? What is it you are suggesting as an alternative? As to where being free to do what you want within the rule of law and where it's got us; states run like this are wealthier. They have greater gender equality. They have higher literacy. They have less infant deaths. In short, none of the alternatives really have much appeal. And if that means that some people use their freedom within the law to do things that you don't approve of, tough. people free to do what they want within the law....i give you drunks that cost us a fortune every week in policing and courts..vomit covered streets..violence...noise and general fighting and gross behaviour and all that goes with it.....tough..yes but very unpleasant.....liberalisation of the drinking culture and drinking hours.... liberalism.....has been a disaster..but luckily societies change..it all goes round and round....but not before liberalism and unthought out liberals have manged to ruin lives.... one of the best bits of liberalism was a very young very drunk and obnoxious young man and his equally drunk scantily dressed female.....whose ultra liberal[in all things] father was picking them up... they were having sex when father arived...father was rather up set at the son having sex on a wall in full view of a mob of chanting youngsters and remostrated...as the young man pointed out ""you gave me the jhonnys dad "" so whats your gripe..the young man then threw up all over his father and follwed with the comments ""and you paid for that as well""
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Aug 12, 2010 17:24:05 GMT
Mouse, What would you suggest as an alternative to people being free to do what they want within the law?? This is the stupidest conversation yet. Should we have state control? No rule of law? What is it you are suggesting as an alternative? As to where being free to do what you want within the rule of law and where it's got us; states run like this are wealthier. They have greater gender equality. They have higher literacy. They have less infant deaths. In short, none of the alternatives really have much appeal. And if that means that some people use their freedom within the law to do things that you don't approve of, tough. people free to do what they want within the law....i give you drunks that cost us a fortune every week in policing and courts..vomit covered streets..violence...noise and general fighting and gross behaviour and all that goes with it.....tough..yes but very unpleasant.....liberalisation of the drinking culture and drinking hours.... liberalism.....has been a disaster..but luckily societies change..it all goes round and round....but not before liberalism and unthought out liberals have manged to ruin lives.... one of the best bits of liberalism was a very young very drunk and obnoxious young man and his equally drunk scantily dressed female.....whose ultra liberal[in all things] father was picking them up... they were having sex when father arived...father was rather up set at the son having sex on a wall in full view of a mob of chanting youngsters and remostrated...as the young man pointed out ""you gave me the jhonnys dad "" so whats your gripe..the young man then threw up all over his father and follwed with the comments ""and you paid for that as well"" So answer my question. What is the alternative? Maybe we should have relgious police patrolling the streets and beating those girls who are not adequately covered up in public? Maybe we should police the amount that people drink, and forbid them to drink more than the right number of units? Is that what you would prefer? The police/nanny state model? Some good old GDR or Saudi Arabian moral police? Answer the question. I didn't ask you for a list of things that you don't approve of; I asked you what your alternative was to freedom within the rule of law.
|
|
|
Post by aubrey on Aug 12, 2010 18:45:12 GMT
Where did that story come from, Mouse (the shagging/puking youth one)?
|
|
|
Post by Big Lin on Aug 12, 2010 20:41:26 GMT
I don't accept that the problem is with liberalism, or tolerance, or too much freedom.
The trouble is that too many people are ILLIBERAL, INTOLERANT and OPPOSED to granting others freedom.
Whether it's fundamentalist Christians, Wahhabist Muslims, Orthodox Jews, the Hindu fundamentalists of the BJP, Sikh racists who routinely fight with Muslims, fundamentalist Marxists, neo-Nazis or whatever - it all comes down to the same thing.
It's NOT freedom but the lack of respect for freedom.
It's NOT tolerance but intolerance.
It's NOT liberalism but illiberalism.
THOSE are the attitudes which are causing all the problems.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 13, 2010 5:53:26 GMT
Where did that story come from, Mouse (the shagging/puking youth one)? it came from cheshire..
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 13, 2010 6:33:55 GMT
no it isnt outrageous....but its rather stupid not to look around and see where liberalism has got us to...even liberals ought to look ahead and see the possibilities of where being OVERLY liberal can lead...so far its led us down a very dodgy road in various areas of our national life what some see as liberal others see as licence,,,,and act acordingly... Meanwhile, the liberal position is to let people be and do what they wish within the law. Liberals tolerate the intolerable because they don't have to live with the consequences. Yet the problem is in part caused by liberal values. Mouse, What would you suggest as an alternative to people being free to do what they want within the law?? This is the stupidest conversation yet. Should we have state control? No rule of law? What is it you are suggesting as an alternative? As to where being free to do what you want within the rule of law and where it's got us; states run like this are wealthier. They have greater gender equality. They have higher literacy. They have less infant deaths. In short, none of the alternatives really have much appeal. And if that means that some people use their freedom within the law to do things that you don't approve of, tough. ideally no there would be les and less state control and its not about doing things within the law that i dont aprove of but about using liberal laws and freedoms RESPONSIBLY freedom/liberalism has to go hand in hand with responsibilities.. we have through liberalism young girls having babies..babies they cannot financially suport.. because it was their freedom to shag some spotty youth..and its their freedom to get a council property..and its their freedom to live on benefits etc and the std rates continue to climb higher and higher...and their freedom is some one elses burden.... well no sorry that isnt freedom that is licence,,licence caused by liberalism and utter stupdity....many of those young girls are then caught up in a trap of poverty....liberal thingking is all very well..as is freedom....but the price paid by many is too high too many see freedom as licence and too many liberals live in cloud cukoo land and as aliba brown so rightly said dont live with the results of their liberalism...... liberalism is well in theory...the reality is liberalism has got us a society where every one knows their rights but non of their responsibilities the liberal agenda has been a disaster....and we all know it.. while many things may be lawful.....it doesnt follow that being lawful is necessarily good for the individual or society as a whole
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 13, 2010 6:49:13 GMT
so the alternative is to teach responsibilities instead of pounding on about rights.. and frankly..the right to do what they want within the law...is a total nonsence ... the debt in this country is horrendous[personal debt] and why is that ..... kids who dont know who their fathers are...... behaviour in schools bad diets and obseity the drinking culture just 5 major problems brought about by liberalisation and through liberalisation the dumbing down of what were acepted social norms....but the liberals played to the greed and constraints were done away with
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 13, 2010 6:50:44 GMT
typical liberal cant see the wood for the trees
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 13, 2010 6:59:30 GMT
I It's NOT freedom but the lack of respect for freedom. It's NOT tolerance but intolerance. It's NOT liberalism but illiberalism. THOSE are the attitudes which are causing all the problems. all very worthy lin....but your comming from a ""your ""perspective..which is all well and good....and that is the main sticking point... but what you see as liberalism others see and take as licence same with freedom.....that is the stumbling block and why liberalism will go down the pan.....as it has done so many times in history and where as we have seen in our country...the rights of people like hamza..choudary et all...and the rights of the burkha wearing,, enforced halal and cock a snook at school uniforms and acepted social norms are upheld by the liberals these same liberals squeal like stuck pigs when people like van gogh...wilders etc me and others stand on our rights to object and would silence us...
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Aug 13, 2010 7:48:55 GMT
so the alternative is to teach responsibilities instead of pounding on about rights.. and frankly..the right to do what they want within the law...is a total nonsence ... the debt in this country is horrendous[personal debt] and why is that ..... kids who dont know who their fathers are...... behaviour in schools bad diets and obseity the drinking culture just 5 major problems brought about by liberalisation and through liberalisation the dumbing down of what were acepted social norms....but the liberals played to the greed and constraints were done away with Another list of things you don't approve of. You don't want more state control. Obesity is a problem caused by people being free to eat what they like, but you don't want more state intervention. I'm sorry, but I don't see what it is you DO want. It seems that you want people to be different from what they are. And you blame those of us on the right for the fact that people are not different from how they are. I still can't see where you have answered my question. Let me ask you it again. What is the alternative to people being free to do what they like within the law? (And please don't answer by another list of things you don't approve of.)
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Aug 13, 2010 9:20:12 GMT
oh they are not things just i dont aprove of..they are things the gov has angst about... what do i want...i want more responsibility....the answer is for the liberals to stop bleating on about how wonderful liberalism is...get a life and see where their utterly stupid liberal thinking has led to the detriment of individuals and society as a whole instead of bleating about rights and liberalism...start with pointing out responsibilities....start making people acept responsibilities for their own actions instead of the victim..blame..always some one elses fault culture for eg..youths and girls who are free to shag around...and babies and std,s will inevitably follow for many...so instead of the liberal ""there there its not your fault "" lets have yes its your fault that you took no responsibility a mindset change of instead of the no blame society...we have a society which puts the blame for stupidity right where it belongs on the individual..lets stop with the wishy washy excuses...and expect better ..lets have a society which flys in the face of liberalism and expects people to be answerable for their actions and the results of their actions.......all within the law...but with restraint and without asking others to foot the bill liberalism and its adherents really need to get a grip on reality..and the reality is...we are ALL responsible for our own actions....and that is where and why the liberals fail because they dont have to live with the results of their liberal thinking....perhaps if they did they would be a little more realistic and now i shall excersise my freedom...and go on a fun shop and indulge myself with un-necessary goodies.....
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Aug 13, 2010 9:30:33 GMT
oh they are not things just i dont aprove of..they are things the gov has angst about... what do i want...i want more responsibility....the answer is for the liberals to stop bleating on about how wonderful liberalism is...get a life and see where their utterly stupid liberal thinking has led to the detriment of individuals and society as a whole instead of bleating about rights and liberalism...start with pointing out responsibilities....start making people acept responsibilities for their own actions instead of the victim..blame..always some one elses fault culture for eg..youths and girls who are free to shag around...and babies and std,s will inevitably follow for many...so instead of the liberal ""there there its not your fault "" lets have yes its your fault that you took no responsibility a mindset change of instead of the no blame society...we have a society which puts the blame for stupidity right where it belongs on the individual..lets stop with the wishy washy excuses...and expect better ..lets have a society which flys in the face of liberalism and expects people to be answerable for their actions and the results of their actions.......all within the law...but with restraint and without asking others to foot the bill liberalism and its adherents really need to get a grip on reality..and the reality is...we are ALL responsible for our own actions....and that is where and why the liberals fail because they dont have to live with the results of their liberal thinking....perhaps if they did they would be a little more realistic and now i shall excersise my freedom...and go on a fun shop and indulge myself with un-necessary goodies..... Maybe I'll give this up, as you obviously think you're answering my question and I don't think you are. My question was meant to be explicitly political. Not moral. Not spiritual. Politically we are free to do what we like provided we don't break the law. That's the essence of classic liberalism and has been all the way from Mills to Thatcher/Reagan and beyond. It's been the underpinning principle of every Western Government and, as I've already said, states based on that principle are wealthier, healthier and more peaceful than theocracies or totalitarian states. (I'm really not sure where you're getting this 'failed liberal state' thing from or what you're using as the measure for that, because the evidence all around us suggests that states based on liberal principles and democracy are the ones which DON'T fail.) Inevitably within that freedom are those who will take advantage, and how we arrange our affairs politically at a micro level can address such problems, or make them worse. Yes we could reform the benefits system, reform the health system or whatever. There is no one single model for the detail. Things in France are arranged differently from things in the USA (say), but both states are firmly based on the traditions of their citizens being free to do what they like within the law. But I'm asking you at a macro political level. What would you replace freedom within the law with? Fascism? Socialism? A theocracy? I can't see any other alternatives. The opposite of a liberal state is a socialist/fascist/totalitarian state. You wittering on about promiscuity and obeseity does not address that point. I would like to respond to some of the things you have said but I feel that if I do you will then continue to avoid the key point I am trying to get you to answer, so let's just say for the time being that all the things you've identified are problems of attitudes and behaviour that cause problems. The state could address these attitudes and behaviours by direct intervention (force-feeding fatties five fruit and veg a day?). It doesn't. The state does not tell us what our morals should be. It does not legislate in our private sphere. So, one more time - what is it you want to change - the rule of law or the idea that we should all be free to do whatever we like provided it's not against the law?I'll leave the moral crusades to the moralists. I'm interested in politics, not morals, specifically in political philosophy underpinning the state. Politically, at a macro level, IF NOT FREEDOM TO ACT AS WE WISH WITHIN THE LAW, what???You seem to be arguing for nanny-state Stasi interventionism in everything from our diet to our sex lives. Like a good Stalinist.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Aug 13, 2010 11:47:41 GMT
so the alternative is to teach responsibilities instead of pounding on about rights.. and frankly..the right to do what they want within the law...is a total nonsence ... the debt in this country is horrendous[personal debt] and why is that ..... kids who dont know who their fathers are...... behaviour in schools bad diets and obseity the drinking culture just 5 major problems brought about by liberalisation and through liberalisation the dumbing down of what were acepted social norms....but the liberals played to the greed and constraints were done away with Another list of things you don't approve of. You don't want more state control. Obesity is a problem caused by people being free to eat what they like, but you don't want more state intervention. I'm sorry, but I don't see what it is you DO want. It seems that you want people to be different from what they are. And you blame those of us on the right for the fact that people are not different from how they are. I still can't see where you have answered my question. Let me ask you it again. What is the alternative to people being free to do what they like within the law? (And please don't answer by another list of things you don't approve of.) the answer is so very simple. you simply have to comprehend the irrefutable FACT that EVERYONE is solely responsible for their own actions, and that NO outside environment has any relevance to it. each and every individual is totally accountable for each and every act that they do. EVERYTHING, without exception, that anyone ever does is strictly their choice, no one and no thing else has any effect on it. they are responsible for it, period. the reality truly isn't that hard to grasp
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Aug 13, 2010 12:46:46 GMT
oh they are not things just i dont aprove of..they are things the gov has angst about... what do i want...i want more responsibility....the answer is for the liberals to stop bleating on about how wonderful liberalism is...get a life and see where their utterly stupid liberal thinking has led to the detriment of individuals and society as a whole instead of bleating about rights and liberalism...start with pointing out responsibilities....start making people acept responsibilities for their own actions instead of the victim..blame..always some one elses fault culture for eg..youths and girls who are free to shag around...and babies and std,s will inevitably follow for many...so instead of the liberal ""there there its not your fault "" lets have yes its your fault that you took no responsibility a mindset change of instead of the no blame society...we have a society which puts the blame for stupidity right where it belongs on the individual..lets stop with the wishy washy excuses...and expect better ..lets have a society which flys in the face of liberalism and expects people to be answerable for their actions and the results of their actions.......all within the law...but with restraint and without asking others to foot the bill liberalism and its adherents really need to get a grip on reality..and the reality is...we are ALL responsible for our own actions....and that is where and why the liberals fail because they dont have to live with the results of their liberal thinking....perhaps if they did they would be a little more realistic and now i shall excersise my freedom...and go on a fun shop and indulge myself with un-necessary goodies..... Maybe I'll give this up, as you obviously think you're answering my question and I don't think you are. My question was meant to be explicitly political. Not moral. Not spiritual. Politically we are free to do what we like provided we don't break the law. That's the essence of classic liberalism and has been all the way from Mills to Thatcher/Reagan and beyond. It's been the underpinning principle of every Western Government and, as I've already said, states based on that principle are wealthier, healthier and more peaceful than theocracies or totalitarian states. (I'm really not sure where you're getting this 'failed liberal state' thing from or what you're using as the measure for that, because the evidence all around us suggests that states based on liberal principles and democracy are the ones which DON'T fail.) Inevitably within that freedom are those who will take advantage, and how we arrange our affairs politically at a micro level can address such problems, or make them worse. Yes we could reform the benefits system, reform the health system or whatever. There is no one single model for the detail. Things in France are arranged differently from things in the USA (say), but both states are firmly based on the traditions of their citizens being free to do what they like within the law. But I'm asking you at a macro political level. What would you replace freedom within the law with? Fascism? Socialism? A theocracy? I can't see any other alternatives. The opposite of a liberal state is a socialist/fascist/totalitarian state. You wittering on about promiscuity and obeseity does not address that point. I would like to respond to some of the things you have said but I feel that if I do you will then continue to avoid the key point I am trying to get you to answer, so let's just say for the time being that all the things you've identified are problems of attitudes and behaviour that cause problems. The state could address these attitudes and behaviours by direct intervention (force-feeding fatties five fruit and veg a day?). It doesn't. The state does not tell us what our morals should be. It does not legislate in our private sphere. So, one more time - what is it you want to change - the rule of law or the idea that we should all be free to do whatever we like provided it's not against the law?I'll leave the moral crusades to the moralists. I'm interested in politics, not morals, specifically in political philosophy underpinning the state. Politically, at a macro level, IF NOT FREEDOM TO ACT AS WE WISH WITHIN THE LAW, what???You seem to be arguing for nanny-state Stasi interventionism in everything from our diet to our sex lives. Like a good Stalinist. ACT AS WE WISH WITHIN THE LAW see, that is where you fail. totally disregarding crime, murder, robbery, etc, you do NOT have freedom to act. EVERY law that is enacted diminishes your freedom. i like to drive 80 and 85 miles an hour, (128.75 kilometers to you.) on the freeway, where the speed limit is 65 or 70. there is NO rational reason for me to not be able to, but, someone has decided that i can't, and made a law saying so. any time that there are two or more humans in the same spot, there has to be rules. that is due to the inherent greed and selfishness of the human species. i have a tshirt that says "stupidity is not a crime, you're free to go", but it is only half right. stupidity SHOULD be a crime. anything that you do that actually adversely affects someone else should be a crime. the reality is that those who choose to eat a pound of cake a day, or live at mcdonal's, ARE adversely affecting YOU. those who choose to drink and drive, use drugs, etc, ARE adversely affecting you personally. you like to bitch that people shouldn't have the right to intentionally offend someone, even though that does not hurt anyone, yet you want to allow those who so obviously harm you to go merrily on their way. suicide used to be a crime, and in some places, a capital crime. i'm not aware of anyone being executed for having committed suicide, but, the law was a good one. you do NOT have a right to make a choice that actually harms anyone else, and government needs to address that
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Aug 13, 2010 13:13:28 GMT
Jumbo, you're just doing what Mouse did, which is to list the kind of idiotic and selfish behaviours that some people demonstrate and comment on how it impacts on the rest of us.
Neither of you are actually addressing the question.
Mouse is opposed to individual freedom within the law. Are you?
Of course there will always be humans who are stupid, selfish, worthless, disrespectful, etc. But if they're not breaking the law, how should we respond?
The ultimate logic of the position that you and Mouse are putting forward is that we SHOULD NOT have freedom within the law. Which is concerning.
|
|
|
Post by jade on Aug 13, 2010 14:05:29 GMT
I find it interesting that the people who would cry loudest about freedom if it were taken away from us are the very ones that want to close down the freedoms I currently enjoy
I can wear what I like (within the bounds of decency)
I can shop whenever I like
Nobody can harm me without fearing the law
I doubt I will ever be locked up without anyone telling me why
I may worship whichever God I choose or none
Why would they want to take these from me, do you think?
|
|
|
Post by riotgrrl on Aug 13, 2010 14:20:24 GMT
I find it interesting that the people who would cry loudest about freedom if it were taken away from us are the very ones that want to close down the freedoms I currently enjoy I can wear what I like (within the bounds of decency) I can shop whenever I like Nobody can harm me without fearing the law I doubt I will ever be locked up without anyone telling me why I may worship whichever God I choose or none Why would they want to take these from me, do you think? By 'they' do you mean Mouse, Jumbo & Bushadmirer? Or somebody else? I think I'm in the same situation as you. The very posters who claim to be of the right are the very ones who want to reduce our private freedoms. I'm curious as to how they think the state should be, as the opposite of freedom is totalitarianism (politically). I'm as confused by this turn of events are you are.
|
|