US Politics: Tragedy of the Commons? What's that?

[Free Northman Reborn]

FNR,

I believe in smaller government. I have for decades. I think it is as wrong for the State to tell me I can buy or make beer (it's bad for you) as it is for the State to tell me I can't buy or make beer because it's "unChristian" to do so.

If my actions harm another or may serve to harm another the State may, in my opinion, regulate. Otherwise, leave me the hell alone.

Yeah, I think you are skirting around my direct question, unfortunately.

Remember what we're debating: We're not debating whether you agree with Huckabee's ideology or not. We're asking whether Huckabee's agenda is consistent with his claimed ideology.

So, to get back to the question: If there is a hypothetical society where murder was historically acceptable, for whatever cultural reason, and if a Christian government came to power through some electoral miracle, do you think that the God that Huckabee worships would be in favor of the government enforcing a prohibition against murder, even if the majority of people in the country would otherwise have wanted murder to be legal?

This is an important question, because it forms the basis of the logic that supports the rest of the argument.

Would Huckabee's God be in favor of a state enforced prohibition against murder or not?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

FNR,

You are missing my point. Huckabee plays to the "look at Obama abusing his power!" crowd while being more than happy to engage in the use of State power to compel people just like the man he criticizes.

Huckabee is pretty much the "Anti-Scot".

[aceluby]

Yeah, I think you are skirting around my direct question, unfortunately.

Remember what we're debating: We're not debating whether you agree with Huckabee's ideology or not. We're asking whether Huckabee's agenda is consistent with his claimed ideology.

So, to get back to the question: If there is a hypothetical society where murder was historically acceptable, for whatever cultural reason, and if a Christian government came to power through some electoral miracle, do you think that the God that Huckabee worships would be in favor of the government enforcing a prohibition against murder, even if the majority of people in the country would otherwise have wanted murder to be legal?

This is an important question, because it forms the basis of the logic that supports the rest of the argument.

Would Huckabee's God be in favor of a state enforced prohibition against murder or not?

This is an incredibly stupid hypothetical.

Why not use a real historical event like prohibition? Murder is and has never been outlawed because of religion. People have been punished for murder since hunter/gatherer days.

[Durckad]

I don't know. Was Huckabee's god in favor of the inquisitions, witch trials, and crusades that plagued the religious nations of the past?

It seems to me that regardless of what god may or may not embody, man will try to find a way to twist or use it for his own advantage.

[Free Northman Reborn]

This is an incredibly stupid hypothetical.

Why not use a real historical event like prohibition? Murder is and has never been outlawed because of religion. People have been punished for murder since hunter/gatherer days.

I would think it is easy to understand why I use the example of murder. Because we all agree that murder should be prohibited. And once someone accepts that in their view "God", if he exists, would be in favor of its prohibition too, then the immediate next question is why He would then not be in favor of the prohibition of stealing, lying, adultery etc, by law?

I'm just waiting for one person to honestly say that they don't think God would be in favor of murder being illegal. And if He is in favor of that, then He would surely be consistent in His view on how sins should be approached from a government's perspective.

[davos]

Yeah, I think you are skirting around my direct question, unfortunately.

Remember what we're debating: We're not debating whether you agree with Huckabee's ideology or not. We're asking whether Huckabee's agenda is consistent with his claimed ideology.

So, to get back to the question: If there is a hypothetical society where murder was historically acceptable, for whatever cultural reason, and if a Christian government came to power through some electoral miracle, do you think that the God that Huckabee worships would be in favor of the government enforcing a prohibition against murder, even if the majority of people in the country would otherwise have wanted murder to be legal?

This is an important question, because it forms the basis of the logic that supports the rest of the argument.

Would Huckabee's God be in favor of a state enforced prohibition against murder or not?

You have to bend over backwards, to create a ludicrous hypothetical to try to get people to manipulate people into granting at least a portion of your argument. It requires us to speculate on what Huckabee's God would want,. We can not know or speculate on the mind of an entity many of us simply do not believe exists or believe is very different from that which Huckabee worships. I have little doubt Huckabee is a true believer. This does not make the policies he advocates any less onerous. True believers have been responsible for many atrocities and abuses of power over the centuries. The fact that he maybe one is as strong an argument as can be made to keep him as far as possible from wielding real power.

[Paladin of Ice]

I think Huckabee's version of god would probably be intent on destroying said society rather than trying to reform it, ala Sodom and Gomorrah. Also, your question is so dumb and a blatant strawman that it doesn't deserve to be taken seriously. Especially given that the christian god apparently wants us to choose him and gives us the free will to not do so.

As for the earlier question about lefties hating right wing leaders and such, I usually don't, except in egregious cases, (religious zealots who want to force everyone and everything to be like them tend to get this more than any other types) or in my bitter moments. Nor do I presume to judge what sort of people they're like in their private lives, and they may well be kind, supportive parents, good neighbors, charitable, courteous and friendly towards strangers, yada yada. It doesn't change the fact that their ideas, prejudices, and laws passed have in quite a few cases hurt friends of mine, and are harmful to other people like those friends, or to my country, often for little to no logical reason beyond their own unthinking prejudices.

So yeah, sometimes that shit gets me willing to say angry, vitriolic things in response. Given how many decades righties have been getting angry, vitriolic and rage filled at lefties and left leaders, I'm not sure exactly why they're so threatened by it now, or why they hate the taste of their own medicine so much.

[Wise Fool]

Yeah, I think you are skirting around my direct question, unfortunately.

Remember what we're debating: We're not debating whether you agree with Huckabee's ideology or not. We're asking whether Huckabee's agenda is consistent with his claimed ideology.

So, to get back to the question: If there is a hypothetical society where murder was historically acceptable, for whatever cultural reason, and if a Christian government came to power through some electoral miracle, do you think that the God that Huckabee worships would be in favor of the government enforcing a prohibition against murder, even if the majority of people in the country would otherwise have wanted murder to be legal?

This is an important question, because it forms the basis of the logic that supports the rest of the argument.

Would Huckabee's God be in favor of a state enforced prohibition against murder or not?

Actually what's unfortunate is that you began by disclaiming that you don't speak for God, followed by two pages of you speculating on what God does or doesn't want.

Your argument is pretty stupid too. The question is Huckabee, not God. Would Huckabee be in favor of outlawing lust, for example? Or arrogance? Or lying? Or not caring for the poor? He would if he was consistent in your "logic" of "outlawing sins," except he's not, and probably cannot be. Faith does not follow some internally consistent set of logical rules; even true faith doesn't, and whatever Huck believes in his inner monologue is frankly irrelevant to just about everything. Pretending otherwise is a fool's game.

And I like games! Let's spend the entire rest of the thread indulging your pointless meanderings even though you said you'd bring it to a different thread! That'll be fun!

[The Iceman of the North]

I'm just waiting for one person to honestly say that they don't think God would be in favor of murder being illegal. And if He is in favor of that, then He would surely be consistent in His view on how sins should be approached from a government's perspective.

I fail to see the logic in your arguments. What does murder as a sin and murder as a crime have to do with each other? Just because that god of yours consider murder a sin, just like any society throughout history consider murder wrong, doesn't mean that anything considered a sin ought to be a crime.

[Free Northman Reborn]

Actually what's unfortunate is that you began by disclaiming that you don't speak for God, followed by two pages of you speculating on what God does or doesn't want.

Your argument is pretty stupid too. The question is Huckabee, not God. Would Huckabee be in favor of outlawing lust, for example? Or arrogance? Or lying? Or not caring for the poor? He would if he was consistent in your "logic" of "outlawing sins," except he's not, and probably cannot be. Faith does not follow some internally consistent set of logical rules; even true faith doesn't, and whatever Huck believes in his inner monologue is frankly irrelevant to just about everything. Pretending otherwise is a fool's game.

And I like games! Let's spend the entire rest of the thread indulging your pointless meanderings even though you said you'd bring it to a different thread! That'll be fun!

The initial assertion was that Huckabee's agenda is somehow inconsistent with his professed faith.

I'm showing why that is clearly not the case.

To most people here, Huckabee's ideology is so far removed from their own that they cannot be bothered with the effort to put themselves in his shoes and test the internal consistency of his agenda. So be it.

Scott, you're the guy I was really debating this with, because I know you like to test the philosophical underpinnings of your beliefs quite often on this forum.

For those who consider Christian faith to be nothing more than a laughable absurdity, well, it's not THAT unexpected that they feel this is a pointless argument, even though it's based on a simple and logical proposition.

I'll end it there, then.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

FNR,

It is not in Huckabee's Christian faith that I see hypocrisy. It is in his claim to oppose the abuse of government power. I've started the thread.

[Ramsay Gimp]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/assets/2014/04/battlefieldcasualties.jpg

hehe

[ThinkerX]

Seems that posters here were so busy freaking out about Palin they missed this:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/new-york-representative-michael-grimm-indicted-fraud-charges-n91286

New York Rep. Michael Grimm surrendered to the FBI Monday morning and was arrested on federal charges, including tax fraud and mail fraud, for allegedly concealing more than $1 million in sales and wages at a Manhattan restaurant he owned before he was elected to Congress.

Grimm was charged Monday in a 20-count indictment that accuses him of under-reporting the payroll and earnings of the Upper East Side restaurant, Healthalicious, which he ran from 2007 to 2010. He was being arraigned in federal court.

Maybe this will result in a new election for that seat? Or is it filled by appointment?

[Paladin of Ice]

At this point at least I know Grimm is trying to stay in things and hold on until the election and fight to hold onto the seat. It'll remain to be seen, hwoever, exactly how well he does with that.

[BloodRider]

Seems that posters here were so busy freaking out about Palin they missed this:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/new-york-representative-michael-grimm-indicted-fraud-charges-n91286


Maybe this will result in a new election for that seat? Or is it filled by appointment?

He sounds like a real class act. He and Bundy are two peas in a pod. Except for the calling for armed revolution when caught.

EDIT: After looking him up on Wikipedia, I must admit, since he comes from Manhattan, I was surprised he was a Republican. I was pretty sure he was a Democrat - and the article did not say.

[all swedes are racist]

Grimm is the same guy who told someone (a reporter, maybe?) that he "will break you in half, like a little boy"?

[Gertrude]

Northman -

If murder were historically acceptable to a culture, then that would be the norm. As individuals, we might or might not agree with this, but on the whole, we're fine with it. It's difficult to put myself in that mindset where that is just another thing people disagree about on a personal level, like abortion, gun control or drinking. Essentially, however, it boils down to the same thing. God gave man free will. If man wants to fuck around and say 'sure, you can kill your neighbor', the burden is on us. I'm sure it makes Baby Jesus cry, but - free will. As others have said, free will means nothing if we are forced to behave in certain ways.

... shit, I talked myself out of this as I was writing it. God has to be pleased when people decide to do right, I think that's a given. It wouldn't be Huckabee forcing us to 'act right', it would be the free will of the people who elected him that his policies are put in place to protect people.

So Huckabee is not a hypocrite within this specific parameter. The problem I have with most people who use religion in politics is that they pick and choose what their faith means and how to use it. To know what God wants is presumptuous and the Bible is a very, very poor guide. I generally have faith in people to have the good sense to keep politics and religion separate, although it scares me how close the margin is sometimes.

[Shryke]

Grimm is the same guy who told someone (a reporter, maybe?) that he "will break you in half, like a little boy"?

Yup. The arrest couldn't happen to a nicer piece of shit.

[Phaing]

See, here's the thing. I live in the US. In the US, in the last decade, I was far more likely to be killed by a right-wing terrorist than a Muslim one. More importantly, my chances of being killed by a Muslim extremist are vanishingly low, whereas my chances of having harm done to me or my loved ones by right wing politicians through their laws is actually extremely high. Yes, that harm done by politicians is less harmful than me dying, but it is far more likely, so yes, in a risk assessment, the chance of a right wing politician being involved in causing me direct bodily harm is actually substantially higher since my chances of being injured by a Muslim extremist are practically fucking nil.

Okay, that's almost 3 people in this thread who say RIght Wingers are worse that Muslim Terrorists, this last one qualified it a bit, but it looks more like Legalese.

That means I am too, since I am on the Right.

Now, lets try and get past how dangerous and vicious that sort of sentiment is, but its such a savage put-down that if I really cared what was said on the web I'd be looking for hungry lawyers of my own right about now, or maybe according you you guys I should be arming up to go on a rampage?

:bs:

First of all-

A few words on how many people have been killed in the US by Muslim terror since 9/11-

Charles Kurzman, “Muslim-American Terrorism in 2013,” February 5, 2014. Sixteen Muslim-Americans were indicted for or killed during violent terrorist plots in 2013, including the bombing at the Boston Marathon on April 15, which claimed four lives, plus one of the suspects, and injured more than 200 people, including more than a dozen people who suffered amputations.

http://kurzman.unc.edu/muslim-american-terrorism/

But you had better not leave the US and think things are better out there, you'd be wrong... guess travel is out if you want to keep pretending that Americans that are not Lefties are the worst people on the planet;

10,000 Islamist terrorist attacks since 9/11 -60,000 dead and 90,000 injured

http://www.militantislammonitor.org/article/id/3254

And, as far as these terrible laws that get passed in the same (well, sort of) process that gave us ObamaCare, I guess you people need to spell those out.

Prop 8 was passed in California by a majority Vote.

I guess that means that the majority of Californians are evil, eh?

Secondly-

I am a Veteran that served in Iraq.

The vile and disgusting nature of the accusation that I am worse, a greater danger to the USA that a A.Q. operative would have me all tied up in knots and screaming for justice. I'd be just going nuts right now.... heh.

But I'm not.

Because its no surprise at all that left-wing armchair pontiffs feel that way about me and anyone else that does not follow their political line, not at all.

All the Progs I used to see on the News were always more concerned about Righties than Al Queada, and I can only imagine how they went nuts and then closed the curtain on Nevada, only imagine because I stopped watching them all long ago. They are obsolete anyway, the Net is a much better source of information, especially if you don't want it dressed up as entertainment.

So, anyway, interesting to see something really dark confirmed, but no shock at all.

Just kinda silly, you all should travel more, see the world, its an eye-opener.

:whip:

[Inigima]

FNR: To answer your first question -- the second one is hardly worth responding to -- I can't speak for everyone, but while I generally disapprove of right-wing pols (of course I do, it's why I vote against them), it's not always for the same reason. I think the Louie Gohmerts of the world are intellectually incurious mental midgets who don't understand the world and don't want to try. Contrast with the Mitch McConnells, who I think are perfectly intelligent people who have made a calculated decision to be bastards.

Of course I think plenty of left-wingers are shills too -- I still see red over Feinstein et al on surveillance, for example -- but I am well tired of conservative posters demanding that we bring out the tar and feathers for "our side" when they won't do the same for their own.