User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:21:48 PM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
Again, and again, and again, and again I see ArfCom be suposedly pro-freedom, but then against any freedom against the consensus. It's all well and good to belittle the Left for only "supporting diversity as long as we agree with the diversity", but then, I see the majority here are the EXACT same way with "freedom", and I think it's damned hypocritical. I really do. As for me, I really, truly, FIRMLY believe that a person has a right to do/believe anything they want to, up until the point that their pursuit of that action/belief infringes upon another's right to do so. I really do believe that. That means that i support the right of others to do things and believe things that I do not personally believe in, or want to do. I find this *entirely consistent*, too. So, making the assumption that an individual is in *no way* violating another's right to the pursuit of happiness, I am interested in hearing a defense of the limiting of freedom. Or, please to explain to me why *your* anointed beliefs/acts are somehow more deserving of preservation than another's. I salute you, sir. I really do. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:22:05 PM EDT
[#2]
I gotta say I'm pretty much right with ya Camp Ninja.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:22:49 PM EDT
[#3]
So, making the assumption that an individual is in *no way* violating another's right to the pursuit of happiness
I would only add that this should be defined by real and measurable physical harm. Not some "waah they make me feel icky!" or "for the children" bullshit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:23:21 PM EDT
[#4]
Any disagreement with the dominant arfcom koolaid will result in you being labelled a DU Troll and moderators threatening to lock your account. Get used to it. Do your thinking and dialectical discourse somewhere else!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:23:27 PM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
Again, and again, and again, and again I see ArfCom be suposedly pro-freedom, but then against any freedom against the consensus. It's all well and good to belittle the Left for only "supporting diversity as long as we agree with the diversity", but then, I see the majority here are the EXACT same way with "freedom", and I think it's damned hypocritical. I really do. As for me, I really, truly, FIRMLY believe that a person has a right to do/believe anything they want to, up until the point that their pursuit of that action/belief infringes upon another's right to do so. I really do believe that. That means that i support the right of others to do things and believe things that I do not personally believe in, or want to do. I find this *entirely consistent*, too. So, making the assumption that an individual is in *no way* violating another's right to the pursuit of happiness, I am interested in hearing a defense of the limiting of freedom. Or, please to explain to me why *your* anointed beliefs/acts are somehow more deserving of preservation than another's. agreed, however say you have an individual who is clealry both a citizen and also an enemy of the state (like a imam who preaches terrorism against the US and is also and American citizen). Should tolerance also equal inaction? Slippery sides to all arguments I suppose, but ideally total freedom would be best if it wasnt for some assholes that would ruin it for everybody else. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:26:06 PM EDT
[#6]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Again, and again, and again, and again I see ArfCom be suposedly pro-freedom, but then against any freedom against the consensus. It's all well and good to belittle the Left for only "supporting diversity as long as we agree with the diversity", but then, I see the majority here are the EXACT same way with "freedom", and I think it's damned hypocritical. I really do. As for me, I really, truly, FIRMLY believe that a person has a right to do/believe anything they want to, up until the point that their pursuit of that action/belief infringes upon another's right to do so. I really do believe that. That means that i support the right of others to do things and believe things that I do not personally believe in, or want to do. I find this *entirely consistent*, too. So, making the assumption that an individual is in *no way* violating another's right to the pursuit of happiness, I am interested in hearing a defense of the limiting of freedom. Or, please to explain to me why *your* anointed beliefs/acts are somehow more deserving of preservation than another's. agreed, however say you have an individual who is clealry both a citizen and also an enemy of the state (like a imam who preaches terrorism against the US and is also and American citizen). Should tolerance also equal inaction? Slippery sides to all arguments I suppose, but ideally total freedom would be best if it wasnt for some assholes that would ruin it for everybody else. Well, see, right there, by your description, this individual has clearly stepped out of line with not interfering with others. He has declared war on his country, and encouraged others to join him. He has violated the contract, and should be dealt with swiftly and terribly. Inaction is often as damning as "action". |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:27:17 PM EDT
[#7]
absolute freedom is unachievable in a society
but I understand your question, I think |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:27:47 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
Any disagreement with the dominant arfcom koolaid will result in you being labelled a DU Troll and moderators threatening to lock your account. Get used to it. Do your thinking and dialectical discourse somewhere else! Meh, been here too long for that. Folks here have either accepted me, or continue to ignore. It's all good. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:28:44 PM EDT
[#9]
As for me, I really, truly, FIRMLY believe that a person has a right to do/believe anything they want to, up until the point that their pursuit of that action/belief infringes upon another's right to do so. I really do believe that. That means that i support the right of others to do things and believe things that I do not personally believe in, or want to do. I find this *entirely consistent*, too.
A huge +1 to that right there!  Camp_Ninja!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:30:43 PM EDT
[#10]
Quoted:
Again, and again, and again, and again I see ArfCom be suposedly pro-freedom, but then against any freedom against the consensus. It's all well and good to belittle the Left for only "supporting diversity as long as we agree with the diversity", but then, I see the majority here are the EXACT same way with "freedom", and I think it's damned hypocritical. I really do. Yup. But you're going to get a lot of fucking liars who reply to the poll. An awful lot of ARFcom truly believes that "freedom" does not include smoking a weed, or two guys getting married, or choosing to have an abortion and potentially facing a Judgement in an afterlife. They will all say that they believe in "freedom", but that "freedom" simply does not include acts they disagree with, and they have some pretty convoluted rationalizations for why that should be so. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:30:58 PM EDT
[#11]
No matter how they vote, the truth here is option 2....
I like it! As long as it's *MY* freedom, not yours! |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:31:04 PM EDT
[#12]
Quoted:
Again, and again, and again, and again I see ArfCom be suposedly pro-freedom, but then against any freedom against the consensus. It's all well and good to belittle the Left for only "supporting diversity as long as we agree with the diversity", but then, I see the majority here are the EXACT same way with "freedom", and I think it's damned hypocritical. I really do. As for me, I really, truly, FIRMLY believe that a person has a right to do/believe anything they want to, up until the point that their pursuit of that action/belief infringes upon another's right to do so. I really do believe that. That means that i support the right of others to do things and believe things that I do not personally believe in, or want to do. I find this *entirely consistent*, too. So, making the assumption that an individual is in *no way* violating another's right to the pursuit of happiness, I am interested in hearing a defense of the limiting of freedom. Or, please to explain to me why *your* anointed beliefs/acts are somehow more deserving of preservation than another's. Well, I can't argue with you, because I'm one of the few people who REALLY agrees with you. All I can say in response to your statement above is: "Well said". |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:32:34 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Again, and again, and again, and again I see ArfCom be suposedly pro-freedom, but then against any freedom against the consensus. It's all well and good to belittle the Left for only "supporting diversity as long as we agree with the diversity", but then, I see the majority here are the EXACT same way with "freedom", and I think it's damned hypocritical. I really do. Yup. But you're going to get a lot of fucking liars who reply to the poll. An awful lot of ARFcom truly believes that "freedom" does not include smoking a weed, or two guys getting married, or choosing to have an abortion and potentially facing a Judgement in an afterlife. They will all say that they believe in "freedom", but that "freedom" simply does not include acts they disagree with, and they have some pretty convoluted rationalizations for why that should be so. Agreed, and I *do not want* to start an abortion thread, or hijack my own, but I do have to point out that abortion does not survive the scrutiny of my definition. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:32:46 PM EDT
[#14]
Quoted:
Well, see, right there, by your description, this individual has clearly stepped out of line with not interfering with others. He has declared war on his country, and encouraged others to join him. He has violated the contract, and should be dealt with swiftly and terribly. Inaction is often as damning as "action". Eh, you're walking a fine line on that one. Depending on the circumstances not even the ninnies in the Supreme Court would convict. Free Speech uber alles. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:34:57 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, see, right there, by your description, this individual has clearly stepped out of line with not interfering with others. He has declared war on his country, and encouraged others to join him. He has violated the contract, and should be dealt with swiftly and terribly. Inaction is often as damning as "action". Eh, you're walking a fine line on that one. Depending on the circumstances not even the ninnies in the Supreme Court would convict. Free Speech uber alles. Yeah, I know, but it's the old "yelling fire in a theater" thing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:35:33 PM EDT
[#16]
Am I "free" to ask if that's supposed to be Jerry Garcia in your avatar ? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:35:40 PM EDT
[#17]
I really don't understand what the hell your are talking about. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:37:22 PM EDT
[#18]
I love Freedom. But I am also a firm believer in social contract theory. We give up some of our freedoms to government and to the will of the People at large. It's sorta what we were founded on. The idea that the previous system (Parliament) harmed our freedoms more than we were willing to let government do so. So we replaced it with one that would be more in line with our beliefs.
I love Freedom, but we have always given up some freedom to protect the overriding thing that is Liberty. We did so when we created the national government in 1789 and the citizen of every state did so when each state's government was created. That is the nature of society. ETA: Total freedom is inherently impossible. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:37:55 PM EDT
[#19]
People will say that they support freedom on this thread, then bash other people's beliefs and want to persecute them on the next.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:38:36 PM EDT
[#20]
Quoted:
Am I "free" to ask if that's supposed to be Jerry Garcia in your avatar ? Not only supposed be, but IS! From a shot when they went to Egypt, 1978. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:39:04 PM EDT
[#21]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, see, right there, by your description, this individual has clearly stepped out of line with not interfering with others. He has declared war on his country, and encouraged others to join him. He has violated the contract, and should be dealt with swiftly and terribly. Inaction is often as damning as "action". Eh, you're walking a fine line on that one. Depending on the circumstances not even the ninnies in the Supreme Court would convict. Free Speech uber alles. Yeah, I know, but it's the old "yelling fire in a theater" thing. If you want to pick nits, the Imam's speech is proscribable only if designed to "incite or produce imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action." If the gubment can lock up people who simply advocate overthrow, half this forum would be in jail.  I'm perfectly comfortable with some people getting to say some patently stupid things in the name of greater freedom. The best way to counter bad speech is more speech, and all that.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:39:18 PM EDT
[#22]
Quoted:
I really don't understand what the hell your are talking about. That happens. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:39:28 PM EDT
[#23]
Quoted:
Any disagreement with the dominant arfcom koolaid will result in you being labelled a DU Troll and moderators threatening to lock your account. Get used to it. Do your thinking and dialectical discourse somewhere else! try again T_C_N is pretty well known around here |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:40:01 PM EDT
[#24]
Quoted:
People will say that they support freedom on this thread, then bash other people's beliefs and want to persecute them on the next. True, go post a "should people be allowed to smoke weed" It will be a fucking mess, followed by the friday night "whatcha drinkin thread" that will go off without a hitch other than people bashing others drink of choice.... I always like the threads about the .gov outlawing smoking in private establishments..... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:41:49 PM EDT
[#25]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, see, right there, by your description, this individual has clearly stepped out of line with not interfering with others. He has declared war on his country, and encouraged others to join him. He has violated the contract, and should be dealt with swiftly and terribly. Inaction is often as damning as "action". Eh, you're walking a fine line on that one. Depending on the circumstances not even the ninnies in the Supreme Court would convict. Free Speech uber alles. Yeah, I know, but it's the old "yelling fire in a theater" thing. If you want to pick nits, the Imam's speech is proscribable only if "inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action." If the gubment can lock up people who simply advocate overthrow, half this forum would be in jail. I'm perfectly comfortable with some people getting to say some patently stupid things in the name of greater freedom. The best way to counter bad speech is more speech, and all that.I agree, with caveats. "General" speech, absolutely. Advocating specific acts, or initiating them, another story. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:42:18 PM EDT
[#26]
I really don't see any problem with your thought process. Just as long as I don't have to fund your idea of Freedom with my tax dollars. If you damage your brain with drugs, that is your choice as long as I don't get stuck with the bill to take care of you. Also, I don't intend to change the entire definition of a normal institution like marriage because someone thinks it infringes on their idea of Freedom.
If it doesn't affect me and my family, knock yourself out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:48:02 PM EDT
[#27]
I completely agree with you on this.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:48:09 PM EDT
[#28]
There can't be absolute freedom. It's impossible.
Society sets rules to maintain peace, safety, and order. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:49:23 PM EDT
[#29]
Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose.
EDIT: But Kris Kristofferson and Janis Joplin songs aside, I'm with you about what you say in the OP. I am a libertarian at heart. I believe in as much personal freedom as possible, and as limited government as possible, all the time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:51:23 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted:
There can't be absolute freedom. It's impossible. Society sets rules to maintain peace, safety, and order. It's a good thing that isn't the subject of this thread, then. "You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream - the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order - or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism. Regardless of their sincerity, their humanitarian motives, those who would sacrifice freedom for security have embarked on this downward path. Plutarch warned, 'The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits.'" - Ronald Magnus |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:52:15 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted:
There can't be absolute freedom. It's impossible. Society sets rules to maintain peace, safety, and order. Freedom to do and think as you wish, unless it interferes with another person's right to do so, is not "absolute". In fact, it's fairly well constrained, in my opinion. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:54:11 PM EDT
[#32]
Fuck Freedom as long as I am emperor, than you little peons shall bow down to me Lord ZOIDBERG WOOTWOOTWOOTWOOTWOOTWOOT
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:55:20 PM EDT
[#33]
And on a related note...
All the while the election campaigns were going on, and people were battling over "Obama" signs or "McCain" signs, I had a McCain sign in my yard. A woman down the street had an Obama sign - a much larger one. I had to drive by it on my way to work every morning, and every time I saw it, it depressed me because I do not subscribe to that man's ideology nor do I feel it is good for the country. However, every day I saw it, I also reminded myself of something: "I don't agree with what she says, but I will defend to the death her right to say it." |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 3:57:39 PM EDT
[#34]
Freedom?
I'm all for it! HH |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 4:00:55 PM EDT
[#35]
Married atheist lesbian gun owners getting abortions, that's the kind of freedom I'm about.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 4:04:35 PM EDT
[#36]
Quoted:
Married atheist lesbian gun owners getting abortions, that's the kind of freedom I'm about. While smoking a doob? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 4:06:23 PM EDT
[#37]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Again, and again, and again, and again I see ArfCom be suposedly pro-freedom, but then against any freedom against the consensus. It's all well and good to belittle the Left for only "supporting diversity as long as we agree with the diversity", but then, I see the majority here are the EXACT same way with "freedom", and I think it's damned hypocritical. I really do. Yup. But you're going to get a lot of fucking liars who reply to the poll. An awful lot of ARFcom truly believes that "freedom" does not include smoking a weed, or two guys getting married, or choosing to have an abortion and potentially facing a Judgement in an afterlife. They will all say that they believe in "freedom", but that "freedom" simply does not include acts they disagree with, and they have some pretty convoluted rationalizations for why that should be so. Agreed, and I *do not want* to start an abortion thread, or hijack my own, but I do have to point out that abortion does not survive the scrutiny of my definition. But so long as you're willing to equivocate, you can't very well act shocked when someone else decides that 2A is not really an individual right, and so isn't included in their definition of "freedom". We should have an almost impossibly-high standard for legislating behavior. And i mean that very literally... I'd prefer to live in a world where the fifty year old weird guy down the street might be banging a thirteen year old girl and nobody can say boo about it than one where my every thought or deed must pass muster with every one of a huge array of "special interests". |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 4:09:16 PM EDT
[#38]
Quoted:
Well, see, right there, by your description, this individual has clearly stepped out of line with not interfering with others. He has declared war on his country, and encouraged others to join him. He has violated the contract, and should be dealt with swiftly and terribly. And what about when I stand up, and say that our government has crossed a line into tyranny and the destruction of liberty, and must be brought down? Am I an "enemy of the state", too, for speaking out? I'm violating some supposed "contract" (which I sure as hell never signed, so I don't see how I could be bound by it!). |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 4:09:52 PM EDT
[#39]
Quoted:
I really don't see any problem with your thought process. Just as long as I don't have to fund your idea of Freedom with my tax dollars. If you damage your brain with drugs, that is your choice as long as I don't get stuck with the bill to take care of you. Also, I don't intend to change the entire definition of a normal institution like marriage because someone thinks it infringes on their idea of Freedom. If it doesn't affect me and my family, knock yourself out. So you picked option number 2 |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 4:11:03 PM EDT
[#40]
Machine guns
RPGs carrying a handgun in a daycare alcohol weed crack heroin gay marraige mairage mairrage husbands and husbands and wives and wives abortion insider trading riding motorcycles in parks riding without a helmet dirtbikes on the street mutual fist fights hiring whoever you want firing whoever you want loud stereos smokey exhausts Driving without seatbelts Making whatever cars people will buy regardless of your CAFE rating And the word of the week: Price Gouging. I want all of that stuff to be legal. Beyond the three or four commandments that I know about, I can't think of anything off the top of my head that I want banned. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 4:13:26 PM EDT
[#41]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Married atheist lesbian gun owners getting abortions, that's the kind of freedom I'm about. While smoking a doob? Ha! I knew I forgot something. Smoking a joint while saying the Pledge in public schools |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 4:13:42 PM EDT
[#42]
Quoted:
Quoted:
There can't be absolute freedom. It's impossible. Society sets rules to maintain peace, safety, and order. Freedom to do and think as you wish, unless it interferes with another person's right to do so, is not "absolute". In fact, it's fairly well constrained, in my opinion. Let me throw a couple examples out there. You and I are neighbors in suburbia Townsville, USA. I decide I want to start a fireworks manufacturing plant in my garage. Is that ok? You and I are neighbors in suburbia Townsville, USA. I like mowing my yard in the buff. Is that ok? You and I are neighbors in suburbia Townsville, USA. Your 30 ft fence between us is blocking all the natural light coming into my home. Is that ok? Who decides what is me pursuing happiness, and you being at risk, and/or denied the same freedom, and where do those lines cross? |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 4:17:31 PM EDT
[#43]
My agurment to weed is that it kills your brain cells therefore by your choice you become a burden on the state and to the people because we have to pay for someone to wipe your ass because you are to fucking lazy to get a job with healt care therefore it is inhibiting my freedom.
Thats why drugs like weed, cocain and others are not legal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 4:20:11 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
There can't be absolute freedom. It's impossible. Society sets rules to maintain peace, safety, and order. Freedom to do and think as you wish, unless it interferes with another person's right to do so, is not "absolute". In fact, it's fairly well constrained, in my opinion. Let me throw a couple examples out there. You and I are neighbors in suburbia Townsville, USA. I decide I want to start a fireworks manufacturing plant in my garage. Is that ok? You and I are neighbors in suburbia Townsville, USA. I like mowing my yard in the buff. Is that ok? You and I are neighbors in suburbia Townsville, USA. Your 30 ft fence between us is blocking all the natural light coming into my home. Is that ok? Who decides what is me pursuing happiness, and you being at risk, and/or denied the same freedom, and where do those lines cross? Ok i should change my vote because your mowing in the buff is creapy to little kids and if you want to so a little boy your weiner i have a problem with that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 4:24:26 PM EDT
[#45]
Quoted:
My old man has about 40lbs of gunpowder in his house. Right adjacent to the kitchen, too. Have at it.Quoted:
Quoted:
There can't be absolute freedom. It's impossible. Society sets rules to maintain peace, safety, and order. Freedom to do and think as you wish, unless it interferes with another person's right to do so, is not "absolute". In fact, it's fairly well constrained, in my opinion. Let me throw a couple examples out there. You and I are neighbors in suburbia Townsville, USA. I decide I want to start a fireworks manufacturing plant in my garage. Is that ok? You and I are neighbors in suburbia Townsville, USA. I like mowing my yard in the buff. Is that ok? You and I are neighbors in suburbia Townsville, USA. Your 30 ft fence between us is blocking all the natural light coming into my home. Is that ok? Who decides what is me pursuing happiness, and you being at risk, and/or denied the same freedom, and where do those lines cross? The $64,000 question. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 4:26:14 PM EDT
[#46]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Well, see, right there, by your description, this individual has clearly stepped out of line with not interfering with others. He has declared war on his country, and encouraged others to join him. He has violated the contract, and should be dealt with swiftly and terribly. And what about when I stand up, and say that our government has crossed a line into tyranny and the destruction of liberty, and must be brought down? Am I an "enemy of the state", too, for speaking out? I'm violating some supposed "contract" (which I sure as hell never signed, so I don't see how I could be bound by it!). Yes, that would make you an enemy of the state. The terrorists and traitors that started the war with England were enemies of the state. It wouldn't make you opposed to freedom, though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 4:31:04 PM EDT
[#47]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I really don't see any problem with your thought process. Just as long as I don't have to fund your idea of Freedom with my tax dollars. If you damage your brain with drugs, that is your choice as long as I don't get stuck with the bill to take care of you. Also, I don't intend to change the entire definition of a normal institution like marriage because someone thinks it infringes on their idea of Freedom. If it doesn't affect me and my family, knock yourself out. So you picked option number 2 Not even close. Number two indicated that my Freedom>your Freedom. I just don't want your version of Freedom to cost me money. You can fuck yourself up all you want. You start infringing on my Freedom when you confiscate my wealth to pay for your rehab. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 4:51:38 PM EDT
[#48]
Alot of people who have voted here are lying their asses off. The same thing was asked a few days ago in a different way––––"Do you support gay marriage?"(or something to that effect) And the results were very different.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 4:54:23 PM EDT
[#49]
Quoted:
My agurment to weed is that it kills your brain cells therefore by your choice you become a burden on the state and to the people because we have to pay for someone to wipe your ass because you are to fucking lazy to get a job with healt care therefore it is inhibiting my freedom. Thats why drugs like weed, cocain and others are not legal. ur an idiat! By your logic we should ban alcohol also. Im sure degreasing with carb cleaner isnt that great for you either...let ban it! But the real answer is dont make me pay for your healthcare... |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/18/2008 4:56:39 PM EDT
[#50]
Libertarian.
Don't smoke, but don't care if you do. Don't use drugs, but don't care if you do... don't give a flyin' fuck what anyone else does so long as they aren't harming anyone else. That's what Freedom is to me. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
