Ain't I a sweety? HEH HEH
But are you respected by any others??? I have seen no evidence of that on this Forum.Originally Posted by LOki
and I have a hunch that the only ones you "Respect are those who agree with you (or at least don't comfront you with your garbage)
However, since you refuse to get back on topic but continue your personal rants. I will say Adu---- again.
Last edited by Doniston; 05-25-2007 at 11:23 AM.
Who else is as much a Bush-basher as I???
An Italian Confusious Say: "He who throwist mud, losith ground"
Gunny's nightmare
You spend too much of my time with back handed insults. Be direct. Be a manly asshole.
Gunny's nightmare
True.
Extra Heavy
Sure.
You'd have to be familiar with the reality of respect first.
Well that's complete nonsense.
Welcome to being wrong again.Not rant, not personal rhetoric (and I emphasize "Not Personal") and totally not off topic flaming. Doniston, your opinion is actually nothingness. Insisting it's otherwise would be dumb.
"... whenever any number of men, calling themselves a government, do anything to another man, or to his property, which they had no right to do as individuals, they thereby declare themselves trespassers, robbers, or murderers, according to the nature of their acts." - Lysander Spooner
Ain't I a sweety? HEH HEH
your parting Shit? (opps I'm sorry, parting Shot.)
Who else is as much a Bush-basher as I???
An Italian Confusious Say: "He who throwist mud, losith ground"
Extra Heavy
This is your new strategy then? Wishful thinking? I hope that works out for you.
"... whenever any number of men, calling themselves a government, do anything to another man, or to his property, which they had no right to do as individuals, they thereby declare themselves trespassers, robbers, or murderers, according to the nature of their acts." - Lysander Spooner
Extra Heavy
Ok then.
Since statements of belief are arguments. What kind of validation makes a statement of belief so meaningful that we would be justified in killing someone over it?
"... whenever any number of men, calling themselves a government, do anything to another man, or to his property, which they had no right to do as individuals, they thereby declare themselves trespassers, robbers, or murderers, according to the nature of their acts." - Lysander Spooner
Just Me
I have plenty of respect for Loki, and he is easily capable of dancing circles around you.
I'm even sure he can spell adieu.
“When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.” Edumnd Burke
Just Me
When the other person's statement of belief is a mortal threat to those who who believe as you, and that person's beliefs are not universally acceptable.
“When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.” Edumnd Burke
Ain't I a sweety? HEH HEH
according to PMs, and Rep messages, it is apparent that there are many wo disagree with you. and if you had bothered to noticed, I abbreviate a lot of words.(intentionally) Does that confuse you??? I spell though as tho, democratic as dem, etc.I have plenty of respect for Loki, and he is easily capable of dancing circles around you.
I'm even sure he can spell adieu.
Who else is as much a Bush-basher as I???
An Italian Confusious Say: "He who throwist mud, losith ground"
Extra Heavy
I see that self defense is justifable, but the point of the question I'm asking is meant to be pointed at initiating of the violence, rather than reacting to it.
So, that in mind: What kind of validation makes a statement of belief so meaningful that we would be justified in killing someone over it?
Last edited by LOki; 05-28-2007 at 05:16 AM.
"... whenever any number of men, calling themselves a government, do anything to another man, or to his property, which they had no right to do as individuals, they thereby declare themselves trespassers, robbers, or murderers, according to the nature of their acts." - Lysander Spooner
Banned
You don't. It's a relative thing don't you know?
Just Me
Not even a good try. You're trying to say you abbreviated "adieu" with "adu?"
The fact that those who would agree with you disagree with me only makes me all the more sure of my statement.
“When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.” Edumnd Burke
Just Me
The simple, on-the-surface answer would be "none," because IMO, any circumstance that would justify initiating the violence would STILL amount to be proactive in defending against a perceived future threat.
All things being equal but different, with no threat posed by either side, then violence from one side against the other would not be justified.
“When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.” Edumnd Burke
Extra Heavy
Ok. I still see self defense as a valid argument for the excersise of violence, but what kind of validation makes believing this perception of future threat meaningful enough to initiate proactive violent action?
"... whenever any number of men, calling themselves a government, do anything to another man, or to his property, which they had no right to do as individuals, they thereby declare themselves trespassers, robbers, or murderers, according to the nature of their acts." - Lysander Spooner
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote