MERGED--> So...Ron Paul + Vote Ron Paul - Page 14 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-06-2008, 01:36 PM   #196
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,334
Local Time: 03:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by gherman
but simply, it is the principle of property rights and self determination that formed a basis for the the opposition to civil rights laws.
What's it like in your world? Are their rainbows everywhere? Puppies and kittens?

Were you paying attention during your American history classes?
__________________

__________________
martha is offline  
Old 01-06-2008, 01:38 PM   #197
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 12:14 PM
It appears that some liberals do actually have a big problem with democracy when the results don't suit them.
__________________

__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 01-06-2008, 01:39 PM   #198
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,334
Local Time: 03:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by gherman
The Civil Rights Act was even opposed by Martin Luther King.
Any sources on this?
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 01-06-2008, 01:47 PM   #199
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 05:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by financeguy
It appears that some liberals do actually have a big problem with democracy when the results don't suit them.
Care to elaborate?
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 01-06-2008, 02:43 PM   #200
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 12:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


Care to elaborate?
For example, opposition to allowing states how best to regulate their own affairs.
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 01-06-2008, 02:55 PM   #201
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 05:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by financeguy


For example, opposition to allowing states how best to regulate their own affairs.
But what does it have to do with liberals? We've seen states regulate their own affairs and allow gay marriage and conservatives started asking for a federal ammendment banning it...

So once again your attempt to corner liberals fails.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 01-06-2008, 03:12 PM   #202
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,483
Local Time: 06:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


But what does it have to do with liberals? We've seen states regulate their own affairs and allow gay marriage and conservatives started asking for a federal ammendment banning it...

So once again your attempt to corner liberals fails.


this is a perfect example.

conservatives seem to hate the federal government, unless they can use it to impose their own sense of morality on others. why does someone in Mississippi care what goes on in regards to marriage laws in Massachusetts -- unless we're going to fess up to the truth that the label "conservative" is meaningless, and that the Republican Party is nothing more than a religious organization at present and they fully embrace big spending, big budget Christianism whenever they can.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 01-06-2008, 03:14 PM   #203
She's the One
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,334
Local Time: 03:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by financeguy


For example, opposition to allowing states how best to regulate their own affairs.
This as a reply to the question of "states' rights" is disingenuous. If the states in question were to encourage all their qualified voters to vote, and then those qualified voters actually voted to allow themselves to be excluded from public and private property, then we could talk about it.

Plus, the notion of "states' rights" is anti-democratic. Protecting the rights of all minorities against the abuse of the majority is what democracy is all about. Especially when "regulating their own affairs" really means imposing sanctions for involuntary behavior and skin color.
__________________
martha is offline  
Old 01-06-2008, 03:57 PM   #204
Refugee
 
Infinity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,188
Local Time: 04:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by BonoVoxSupastar


But what does it have to do with liberals? We've seen states regulate their own affairs and allow gay marriage and conservatives started asking for a federal ammendment banning it...

So once again your attempt to corner liberals fails.
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511




this is a perfect example.

conservatives seem to hate the federal government, unless they can use it to impose their own sense of morality on others. why does someone in Mississippi care what goes on in regards to marriage laws in Massachusetts -- unless we're going to fess up to the truth that the label "conservative" is meaningless, and that the Republican Party is nothing more than a religious organization at present and they fully embrace big spending, big budget Christianism whenever they can.
Well you can't count Ron Paul as one of those conservatives can you? That is if he actually said he wants to leave gay marriage to state's rights. I know that he is for equality of gays and straights in the military. So these two points are already much more liberal than the rest of his party.
__________________
Infinity is offline  
Old 01-06-2008, 04:06 PM   #205
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 12:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by gherman
The Civil Rights Act was even opposed by Martin Luther King. As soon as he was assassinated, guess what, we got a Civil Rights Act.
I'm guessing you're confusing JFK with MLK here. Kennedy was assassinated before the Civil Rights Act was passed, and had definitely been dragging his feet over it (though not on account of his beliefs about property rights); King was assassinated almost 4 years after the Civil Rights Act passed, and while he saw its guarantees as inadequate to address African-Americans' socioeconomic situation and worried (correctly) that its passage might cause many Movement supporters to think "mission accomplished" and move on, he certainly didn't oppose it.
Quote:
Allowing private landowners to decide whatever they wish with their own property is not encouraging racism it encourages right to ownership. Blacks have the same right...simply, it is the principle of property rights and self determination that formed a basis for the the opposition to civil rights laws...The federal government overstepped itself and stepped on the states right to decide how they handle the issues by the electing populous within the state.
Of course it encouraged racism...where on earth are you getting this portrait of the segregated South from? Why do you suppose that, oh, pretty much every white business owner just happened to share the same "ridiculous" sentiments as all the rest when it came to allowing black people in their stores and restaurants, on their buses and in their schools? How many Southern blacks do you suppose had access to enough capital, education and for that matter personal safety to exercise that same "right"? Why did the incidence of white-on-black lynchings, beatings, and arson shoot back up when the Civil Rights Movement moved into full swing--you think the Klan was just tweaked about their property rights being infringed upon? Have you ever read prosegregationist literature from the '50s and '60s? Its tonic chord wasn't property rights and individual freedom, it was protecting 'our Anglo-Saxon Christian heritage' from the threatening horde of blacks, atheists and Commie Jews massing at the gate. How many black and white Southerners old enough to remember those times have you actually talked to about how things worked back then?

To answer your question, no, I don't think any states are actually itching to reinstate a full-fledged Jim Crow regime. But melon was addressing present-day civil rights implications such as gay rights (as well as pointing out the historical smoke-and-mirrors act involved in denying the reality and effects of structural discrimination), not suggesting that it's literally 1964 all over again.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 01-06-2008, 04:18 PM   #206
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 06:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Infinitum98
Well you can't count Ron Paul as one of those conservatives can you? That is if he actually said he wants to leave gay marriage to state's rights. I know that he is for equality of gays and straights in the military. So these two points are already much more liberal than the rest of his party.
Except Paul has actually been vocally in opposition to the Supreme Court case that decriminalized sodomy, for instance. Part of his "states' rights" platform includes allowing states to recriminalize that at their whim. Secondly, not only does he seem to support the federal Defense of Marriage Act, but Paul has also supported a federal law that would forbid courts from overturning that law (which, I'm sure, would be deemed unconstitutional, since you can't pass a law that forbids the judiciary from reviewing its constitutionality).

Paul's stances are a substantial step backwards, in terms of civil rights. Perhaps its no wonder that the only people who seem to support him are straight white men.
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 01-06-2008, 04:22 PM   #207
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 06:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by financeguy
For example, opposition to allowing states how best to regulate their own affairs.
A mature democracy balances the rights of the majority with protections for the rights of the minority. We can look to historical Northern Ireland as an example of what happens when a democracy does not.
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 01-06-2008, 04:28 PM   #208
ONE
love, blood, life
 
financeguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 10,122
Local Time: 12:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
Perhaps its no wonder that the only people who seem to support him are straight white men.

No, sorry, wrong.

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=12102

The writer is (a) openly gay
(b) hispanic

So this Paul supporter only fills one of your three criteria.

All I need to do now is find one female supporter of Ron Paul to complete disprove your case, which I don't think will be difficult.
__________________
financeguy is offline  
Old 01-06-2008, 04:36 PM   #209
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 05:14 AM
Yeah, I'm pretty sure Melon meant that as an absolute.

__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 01-06-2008, 04:36 PM   #210
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 06:14 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by gherman
Saying that Paul goes against "mainstream economists" is an easy cop out. The greatest economists of all time such as Smith, Hayek, Mises, and Friedman would all be in the same boat with Paul. What is "mainstream" anyway?
"Mainstream," in terms of monetary policy, is currently monetarism. Considering that Paul resoundedly rejects that, by nature of his advocacy for the gold standard, Friedman would not support this stance. Not only was he the economist that made the most contributions to monetarist theory, but he has openly rejected the gold standard as "impractical."

Quote:
Doesn't Canada have an income tax along with a national sales tax?
Ron Paul wishes to end the Income tax and replace it with nothing. He may be open to a national sales tax but 20%!? I don't think so.
So has Paul ever openly stated what he would cut to pay for this? Economists, further, have explained that a revenue-neutral elimination of the income tax would actually require a 55% national sales tax (although 23% has been banded around a lot over the last few years, the number itself seems to be random).

Has Paul also figured into the fact that most polls indicate that Americans want their cake AND to eat it too? The substantial cuts required to make it revenue neutral would likely lead to...well, substantial public opposition.

Frankly, eliminating the income tax is only a pipe dream for the rich. Most people pay more in property and sales taxes than they ever do in income taxes.

Quote:
The response to states rights is uninformed. States rights form one of the bases of our government. The Civil Rights Act was even opposed by Martin Luther King. As soon as he was assassinated, guess what, we got a Civil Rights Act.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 preceded MLK's assassination by four years. So there goes that argument.

And the rest of your argument is whimsical, at best. Private organizations, residences, and churches have long been able to discriminate as to who they wish to deal with, but businesses do not have that right, as they deal with the public. If one doesn't like that, then they can feel free to close their business. One does not have an "inalienable right" to business.
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com