Old 11-01-2011, 10:16 AM   #151
Rhinoqulous
The Original Rhinoqurilla
 
Rhinoqulous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Somewhere Not-So-Cold with Mountains
Posts: 4,829
Quote:
Victus wrote View Post
Most of the libertarians on the forum have been pretty constantly brow-beaten fr not caring about other human beings, so I wanted to see what kinds of policies people who allegedly care about other human beings would prioritize given a limited number of options. Puppies appear to have been their first choice.
Really? Puppies were the only thing brought up in this thread? I seem to recall a few other things suggested prior to Stern wanting "objective value" placed on not torturing puppies and pushing this thread off-topic for seven pages.

1) Abolishing Term for Life for British Bishops in Parliament
2) Disestablish the link between the Church of England and the Head of State
3) Laws akin to Truth in Advertising for Religious Claims
4) Outlawing the teaching of Creationism and Intelligent Design
5) Campaign donation reform
6) Tax system reform
7) Term limit reform
8) Abolishing Capital Punishment
9) A Flat Tax
10) Taxation of Churches
11) Outlawing For-Profit Military and Prisons
12) Abolishing Vice Laws
13) Eliminating the notion of Corporations as Persons
14) Eliminating Super PACs
15) Reformation of Telecommunications Laws
16) Universal Health Care
18) Drug Law Reform
19) Marriage Law Reform

And finally, as a 20th policy suggestion (by a non-libertarian) we get Nationalization of Animal Cruelty laws. So, you sanctimonious prick, care to comment on the 19 other things brought up besides Animal Cruelty?

Wait just a minute-You expect me to believe-That all this misbehaving-Grew from one enchanted tree? And helpless to fight it-We should all be satisfied-With this magical explanation-For why the living die-And why it's hard to be a decent human being - David Bazan
Rhinoqulous is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2011, 01:58 PM   #152
Victus
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,260
Quote:
Rhinoqulous wrote View Post
Really? Puppies were the only thing brought up in this thread?
Puppies, based on the extent of the discussion, seem to have been the most popular by far.

Quote:
Rhino wrote
I seem to recall a few other things suggested prior to Stern wanting "objective value" placed on not torturing puppies and pushing this thread off-topic for seven pages... So, you sanctimonious prick, care to comment on the 19 other things brought up besides Animal Cruelty?
Ok...

Quote:
Rhino wrote
1) Abolishing Term for Life for British Bishops in Parliament
2) Disestablish the link between the Church of England and the Head of State
3) Laws akin to Truth in Advertising for Religious Claims
4) Outlawing the teaching of Creationism and Intelligent Design[/quote]

Negligible effect on human welfare.

Quote:
Rhino wrote
5) Campaign donation reform
Limits freedom of speech.

Quote:
Rhino wrote
6) Tax system reform
To make it more progressive.

Quote:
Rhino wrote
7) Term limit reform
Marginal effects.

Quote:
Rhino wrote
8) Abolishing Capital Punishment
Entirely worthwhile, but affecting a relatively limited number of people.

Quote:
Rhino wrote
9) A Flat Tax
Entirely worthwhile, but I'm not sure the efficiency gains would be that big.

Quote:
Rhino wrote
10) Taxation of Churches
Worthwhile, but not much revenue to be had (i.e., inconsequential).

Quote:
Rhino wrote
11) Outlawing For-Profit Military and Prisons
Worthwhile, but unlikely to have major effects (prisons being the end-point for what are typically dysfunctional systems).

Quote:
Rhino wrote
12) Abolishing Vice Laws
Extremely worthwhile.

Quote:
Rhino wrote
13) Eliminating the notion of Corporations as Persons
No obvious effect if they are still recognized as legal entities.

Quote:
Rhino wrote
14) Eliminating Super PACs
Limits on political speech.

Quote:
Rhino wrote
15) Reformation of Telecommunications Laws
Regulating the internet.

Quote:
Rhino wrote
16) Universal Health Care
More free stuff for people in the top 25% of the worlds' income earners. Very high priority.

Quote:
Rhino wrote
18) Drug Law Reform
Very worthwhile, especially in the US.

Quote:
Rhino wrote
19) Marriage Law Reform
Worthwhile, but affects only a small percentage of the population directly.

Quote:
Rhino wrote
And finally, as a 20th policy suggestion (by a non-libertarian) we get Nationalization of Animal Cruelty laws.
Doesn't even affect people.

So my point stands. Given 5 policies to work with, almost everyone chose some combination of "free stuff for rich people", "I hate corporations!" and "Quick, let's help this relatively small group I sympathize with!". Oh, and "I like puppies!".

For all the brow beating about not caring about the poor that goes on on these forums, given the choice of their five most cherished policies, most here went along with a series trivial options with dubious effects under the best of conditions. No one lifted a finger to help the poorest on the planet.

But it's all worth it - just as long as the puppies are safe. Right?

"When science was in its infancy, religion tried to strangle it in its cradle." - Robert G. Ingersoll
Victus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2011, 02:16 PM   #153
Sternwallow
I Live Here
 
Sternwallow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 23,211
Quote:
Victus wrote View Post
But it's all worth it - just as long as the puppies are safe. Right?
Puppies follow the smoothest, most pleasant trajectory when kicked. Other animals are less stable while in flight.

"Those who most loudly proclaim their honesty are least likely to possess it."
"Atheism: rejecting all absurdity." S.H.
"Reality, the God alternative"
Sternwallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2011, 02:20 PM   #154
Kate
Mistress Monster Mod'rator Spy
 
Kate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The North Coast
Posts: 15,426

"I do not intend to tiptoe through life only to arrive safely at death."
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Kate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2011, 02:23 PM   #155
Smellyoldgit
Stinkin' Mod
 
Smellyoldgit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Britland
Posts: 13,568

Stop the Holy See men!
Smellyoldgit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2011, 02:23 PM   #156
Kate
Mistress Monster Mod'rator Spy
 
Kate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The North Coast
Posts: 15,426

"I do not intend to tiptoe through life only to arrive safely at death."
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Kate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2011, 02:25 PM   #157
ubs
I Live Here
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: So Cal
Posts: 5,193

Never give a zombie girl a piggy back ride.
ubs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2011, 02:29 PM   #158
Smellyoldgit
Stinkin' Mod
 
Smellyoldgit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Britland
Posts: 13,568

Stop the Holy See men!
Smellyoldgit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2011, 02:47 PM   #159
ubs
I Live Here
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: So Cal
Posts: 5,193
Salon has posted a new Declaration of Independence that makes me think they read RA

Warning: Not a freedom loving declaration.

Never give a zombie girl a piggy back ride.
ubs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2011, 03:46 PM   #160
Victus
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,260
Quote:
ubs wrote View Post
Salon has posted a new Declaration of Independence that makes me think they read RA

Warning: Not a freedom loving declaration.
It gets marginally better near the end, but the average effect is still head-exploding stupidity, I think. The first half can basically be summed up as, "Stuff costs money? Awww!".

"When science was in its infancy, religion tried to strangle it in its cradle." - Robert G. Ingersoll
Victus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2011, 08:03 PM   #161
lostsheep
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,902
Quote:
Sternwallow wrote View Post
Puppies follow the smoothest, most pleasant trajectory when kicked. Other animals are less stable while in flight.
That's so mean...and it's wrong. Cats and kitties are far better fliers, and what about angry birds?

"If God inspired the Bible, why is it such a piece of shit?" (Kaziglu Bey)
lostsheep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-01-2011, 08:08 PM   #162
lostsheep
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,902
Victus: How the fuck is limiting campaign contributions and super PACs limiting free speech? Do you think the wealthy deserve more votes?

Also, animal cruelty laws benefit human beings in the same way environmental laws benefit human beings. These are long term benefits, not short term benefits.

"If God inspired the Bible, why is it such a piece of shit?" (Kaziglu Bey)
lostsheep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2011, 01:25 AM   #163
Victus
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,260
Quote:
lostsheep wrote View Post
Victus: How the fuck is limiting campaign contributions and super PACs limiting free speech?
Suppose you wanted to stand on the street corner handing out pamphlets for your preferred candidate - should that be illegal? Obviously not - this is free speech at its finest.

Suppose that instead of standing on the corner with pamphlets, you merely wanted to buy the pamphlets for the person volunteering to hand them out. Again, interfering either with your purchase of the pamphlets or with their free distribution would constitute an obvious violation of free speech.

Now suppose that in the above examples, instead of an anonymous volunteer it was the candidate themselves. What difference would that make in terms of the effect of outlawing the distribution or finance of said pamphlets (or any other media or form of support) on free speech? None, obviously.

Quote:
LS wrote
Do you think the wealthy deserve more votes?
And how do you propose that they translate their wealth into votes?

Quote:
LS wrote
Also, animal cruelty laws benefit human beings in the same way environmental laws benefit human beings. These are long term benefits, not short term benefits.
Go ahead and explain the long-term benefits of of making it illegal to cook dogs alive, then.

"When science was in its infancy, religion tried to strangle it in its cradle." - Robert G. Ingersoll
Victus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2011, 01:31 PM   #164
nkb
He who walks among the theists
 
nkb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The Big D
Posts: 12,119
Quote:
Victus wrote View Post
Suppose you wanted to stand on the street corner handing out pamphlets for your preferred candidate - should that be illegal? Obviously not - this is free speech at its finest.

Suppose that instead of standing on the corner with pamphlets, you merely wanted to buy the pamphlets for the person volunteering to hand them out. Again, interfering either with your purchase of the pamphlets or with their free distribution would constitute an obvious violation of free speech.

Now suppose that in the above examples, instead of an anonymous volunteer it was the candidate themselves. What difference would that make in terms of the effect of outlawing the distribution or finance of said pamphlets (or any other media or form of support) on free speech? None, obviously.
Not having Super PACs stops them from doing this, how?

All it does is allows people and corporations to hide behind entities that act as anonymous fronts.

Free speech is cool, I'm all for it, but it should apply to individual people, not corporations, ridiculous Supreme Court decisions notwithstanding.

"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one."
George Bernard Shaw
nkb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2011, 01:53 PM   #165
Victus
Obsessed Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 4,260
Quote:
nkb wrote View Post
Not having Super PACs stops them from doing this, how?

All it does is allows people and corporations to hide behind entities that act as anonymous fronts.
So? Suppose you wanted to pay for a candidate's pamphlets anonymously. What would be the problem with that?

Quote:
nkb wrote
Free speech is cool, I'm all for it, but it should apply to individual people, not corporations, ridiculous Supreme Court decisions notwithstanding.
Corporations are simply groups of people. Do those people lose their free speech rights when they group together? Obviously not.

Out of curiosity, should free speech apply to unions?

"When science was in its infancy, religion tried to strangle it in its cradle." - Robert G. Ingersoll
Victus is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:15 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin - Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2000 - , Raving Atheists [dot] com frequency-supranational frequency-supranational