HAPPY 4th of JULY 2011 !!

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by The Other Side, Jul 2, 2011.

  1. The Other Side

    The Other Side Well-Known Troll Troll

    I would like to extend a warm Happy 4th of July to everyone on this board. While we may not all agree on issues, and we find ourselves at odds on some hot topics, we can agree that this right to disagree began when we became a free country.

    I hope you all have a great weekend and you all are safe on the road, air or sea.

  2. Baba gounj

    Baba gounj pensioner

  3. stevetheupsguy

    stevetheupsguy sʇǝʌǝʇɥǝndsƃnʎ

    Actually, the right to disagree started WAY before America. You were given that right, straight from The Almighty, with Whom you may agree, or disagree, just sayin... Oh, and Happy 4th to you and all, as well. Let's be safe out there.
  4. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    Nicely said Steve!
  5. The Other Side

    The Other Side Well-Known Troll Troll

    Steve, you are partially correct and mainly wrong. Indeed, the right to disagree began with the start of time. Animals disagree and some of them become lunch. Man did disagee and one of the partys ended up dead.

    Death was the ultimate settler of disagrements back in time.

    Today, moreluck and I can argue without a shot being fired. Thats freedom.

  6. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    And you would be partly wrong as well. 2 men alone in disagreement ending in lunch was not nearly as common as you want to allege. 2 men alone proved risky and more often than not the risks far outweighted the benefits. But then man learned a very bad habit in that he could form collectives called nationstates, convince non-thinking people that his way was right and then through the use of force and aggression, these nationstates would then have the other people for lunch. Spreading the risk and often avoiding the risk entirely as others did his fighting for him. After the smoke of the battle cleared, he could move in and enjoy the spoils having never lifted a finger.

    It is men who seek the means of collective force that are the ones interested in eating others for lunch and it's always been this way. Just as there are those who would point out those lone individuals among us who commit murder and yet at the same time in the name of nationstates ignore the biggest murderers of all who do so in the name of the collective good. I never drew a line of difference between someone who murders to take someone's property and someone who murders others because they won't obey orders and give up their property.

    Just because you wear a badge or a uniform and not a bandit's mask doesn't mean you aren't a thief or a murderer!
  7. The Other Side

    The Other Side Well-Known Troll Troll


    good points, but thats way too complicated for this crowd. I kept it at flintstones level for reader understandability.

  8. moreluck

    moreluck golden ticket member

  9. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    LMAO!!! YaBBa-Daba-DOOOOOO!

    OK. But in Steve's own why if you will, it was still a good point and I pat him on the back for making it! I see Moreluck showed up to instill her wisdom in this thread.

    July 4th is a real birthday at our house. My son was born on the 4th of July! Best of wishes to all and be safe.
  10. trplnkl

    trplnkl 555

    Well said TOS.

    Oh I don't know, I understood all that he said. It wasn't all that complicated, just long. Not too sure how it applies to free speech though.

  11. stevetheupsguy

    stevetheupsguy sʇǝʌǝʇɥǝndsƃnʎ

    Happiest birthday to wkmac jr, though, if I know you, I doubt he is a jr.:happy2:
  12. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    Thanks Steve and on the name sake, he actually is!
  13. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    Oh that's easy. As long as we live in a society where I can say what I said without interference or repercussion, then we all know we each have free speech. Free speech is not proven sitting on a shelf to be admired on special holidays, nor waxed about glowingly as we speak of our history and our hero's. Free speech is proven in real practice day in and day out when you can speak what you think even in the harshest of terms.

    I believe that a person should be able to say whatever they like, even when the words are offensive and most insulting. If we forbid people to do this, how else will be ever know who the real dumbarses are among us so we can then avoid and isolate them from our mist?

    Seriously, think about that for a moment!
  14. cachsux

    cachsux Wah

  15. diesel96

    diesel96 New Member

    A new Harvard Study shows Fourth of July celebrations turn kids into Republicans, lol .....I think when it comes to celebrating something like the Fourth of July, most reasonable Americans put down their differences and celebrate. Progressives, Conservatives, and everyone else in a kum-ba-yah moment! I did own a red, white, and blue blanket years back, and it would bother me that not only was it touching the ground, but that people were stepping all over it and getting bbq sauce on it. Now I look back and ponder, did this socialized event of watching fireworks display and at the local park, with the local police and fireman as security persuaded me into a little elephant man...Happy Fourth !
  16. trplnkl

    trplnkl 555

    I agree with this ^ .
    What I was referring to was the taking by collective force. Unless that collective force is use to take away the free speech, which was not mentioned in the two paragraphs, it wouldn't apply. I took the post to address property, food etc.
  17. faded jeans

    faded jeans just a member

    Anyone remember this from Hill Street Blues? I betcha moreluck does!.

  18. menotyou

    menotyou bella amicizia

    Happy Birthday to the little wkmac, jr.!!:happy-very:
  19. packageguy

    packageguy Well-Known Member

    Great post,
    Have a safe and fun weekend.
  20. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    OK, I can see how you might see it that way and you would be correct. My comments back to TOS were a counterpoint to his assertion to Steve about men having other men for lunch or in other words, men asserting conquest over other men. It was also to show a point that TOS and I could disagree (in a manner of speaking but not really) and yet nobody had anybody for lunch. This goes back to TOS original point in the 1st post and my reaffirming and standing with him on it and at the same time also expressing appreciation to Steve's point which from my POV also reaffirms TOS original point. And even though I don't share Steve's belief in a higher power, his expression still supports the basis of a shared belief between us and therefore out of my own self interest, I want to protect his thought and speech in the ideal he sees me as no physical threat and will reciprocate in kind. From difference we discover a mutual benefit in which we both enjoy our own liberty as we see fit and no one had anybody for lunch.

    The founding fathers had their sins and many of them too but as TOS pointed out with he and Moreluck, the real spirit of the 4th, the heart of the Declaration of Independence was that men could be free, enjoying the ultimate of liberty and yet in the interest of voluntary mutual expression to one another, live together where each is the King of his own world and thus conflicts minimized and peace and prosperity maximized.

    When men form collective groups, nationstates if you will, the wellbeing of the State becomes the principle purpose and the individual man only propers when his individual will and the will of the state are the same. When the individual's speech eg thought (speech is the public expression of private thought) differs from the collective eg nationstate, then the individual must be suppressed and the most effective means first and foremost is to influence thought. Thought is influenced by what information one is able to obtain and in a transparent world all have the same information and the basic thought will be similar. Same is true in a world were only a certain set of facts are revealed and thus people will tend to reach a conclusion that was intended and not a conclusion based on real facts. Those facts form thoughts which are then expressed publicly as speech. I've just manipulated your speech by the withholding of facts and information and thus I've just committed an act of force against you. That's how I see the last part of my comments you spoke of have to do with free speech. Not sure if that answer is satisfactory to you but it's what I got for now!