Additionally, I am very well armed. I dare any man to come murder me. I would love the challenge.
Sounds more and more like the sociopathic serial killer. Challenge indeed. Sounds like somebody isn't using their Second Amendment. Unless you're in some god-forsaken hellhole where armless civilians get shot by armed outlaws. |
|
|
|
|
Additionally, I am very well armed. I dare any man to come murder me. I would love the challenge.
|
|
|
|
|
I admire the man who lets his dog shit in my yard. I would invite him in for a glass of Cabernet.
|
|
|
|
I guess what would be helpful is if you define "objective", and "rights", and go from there.
If there is isn't a concise universal understanding of those two words and their usage, then everyone will differ in their application. Start with an axiom and go from there is what I'd suggest.
Right - an entitlement of power or good. Objective - Not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts. Applies to a universal human goal, that is in fact universal across all humans. |
|
|
|
If one has the strength to obtain something, they are entitled to it. If they are too weak to obtain an end, then it is not their right.
By your logic, if the big bad government has the power to obtain tax money and make sure everyone gets food and water, then they are entitled to do so. If they are too weak to do so, then it is not their right. Yes, yes. Very good. Now you understand why I would prefer the government weaker. You prefer it stronger. It's all preferences. |
|
|
|
I have no restraints. That disturbs you because you are a highly restrained individual; possibly traumatized.
Yay, let's play 18-year old highly-unexperienced internet psychologist suffering from aspergers, OCD, split-personality disorder and ADD. You've proven your advice to be worthless time and time again. Why are you trying to continuously rack up points for the opposition? Does anyone in the world see the Christmas Special and think for a second I am "restrained"? God. Do you even try to respond anymore or are you just typing with your dick these days? The only perpetual trauma going on around here, is the rape in the eyes that everyone gets from having to read your malformed and under achieved drivel. "Look at me! Look at me! I learned a new word today!" Heh, I am talking about morality here but you are certainly not too inhibited. I respect that, that's for sure. Anyways, do you really think I like attention just for attention's sake? I find it flattering but it's not really that useful. |
|
|
|
|
I am flattered that you find them ridiculous. That's a good sign that I am doing what I prefer: Challenging preconceptions and dogma.
|
|
|
|
What an interesting set of statements. I guess it's good to know your thoughts on the matter.
Your reasons are left undeclared. What a shame.
The majority of users here disagree with you, in case you were wondering why you have such a large piss-stain of an Ignore button. Therefore you have a much higher probability of being WRONG, and need to seriously reconsider your failed position on pretty much everything. Either that or go play in the road. The majority of people on this planet let it get to the piss-stain it is today. I wouldn't listen to them, if I were you. If you're a slave, follow the crowd. If you are a man, use your own reason first. A man chooses. A slave obeys. The way you talk, Atlas, it reminds me of some people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_number_of_victimsI have no restraints. That disturbs you because you are a highly restrained individual; possibly traumatized. I knew you grew up in a rigid, disciplinary Christian home Matthew. Let's talk about it. How does it make you feel when somebody breaks the rules you grew up with? Do you feel a sense of jealousy? Resentment? |
|
|
|
What an interesting set of statements. I guess it's good to know your thoughts on the matter.
Your reasons are left undeclared. What a shame.
The majority of users here disagree with you, in case you were wondering why you have such a large piss-stain of an Ignore button. Therefore you have a much higher probability of being WRONG, and need to seriously reconsider your failed position on pretty much everything. Either that or go play in the road. The majority of people on this planet let it get to the piss-stain it is today. I wouldn't listen to them, if I were you. Having a darker ignore button only means that a large amount of people can't handle my posts; their fragile sensibilities are easily wrecked by my posts. It's flattering they allow me to have such an effect over their happiness. I would be concerned if people accepted my posts with little effort: It would mean I would only be shouting convenient lies. If you're a slave, follow the crowd. If you are a man, use your own reason first. A man chooses. A slave obeys. |
|
|
|
|
People say a man is entitled to free speech when he does not have such. He is shunned and imprisoned when he pushes his so-called "right" to ends not preferred by his government and the powers that be.
People say a man is entitled to food when he refuses to collect it himself and the system and people that provide it can fail at anytime.
Isn't the only thing that defines a "right" is the strength and power of oneself to obtain said entitlement? Isn't a "right" void once the means to enforce it are gone?
What good is a list of human rights when the power to enforce them is easily corrupted and dissolved?
Can one only truly guarantee himself his "rights" by his own self-liberation, strength and ensured means?
To me the concept of "rights" is a spook. If one has the strength to obtain something, they are entitled to it. If they are too weak to obtain an end, then it is not their right. To claim otherwise, is only a plea of faith: pure religion and dogma.
The reality seems to be that men will have power of varying capacities and that no moral dogma can make it otherwise: One can only continue to be vigilant. There are no guarantees or inherent entitlements besides the basic organic powers we are born with.
|
|
|
|
"Selfless love would have to mean that you derive no personal pleasure or happiness from the company and the existence of the person you love, and that you are motivated only by self-sacrificial pity for that person’s need of you. I don’t have to point out to you that no one would be flattered by, nor would accept, a concept of that kind. Love is not self-sacrifice, but the most profound assertion of your own needs and values. It is for your own happiness that you need the person you love, and that is the greatest compliment, the greatest tribute you can pay to that person."
No. Why? |
|
|
|
I'll make it very simple: Who defines an inalienable right? What enforces an inalienable right?
A simple question with a complex answer. I would answer it, but do not believe you are educated enough to understand it. If the process was not included in your education, then I feel that the system has failed you. Since you seem to be interested in social issues, I suggest working on a liberal education at an accredited institution. This is what progressives actually believe. |
|
|
|
|
If you have a bounty you would like to list in this thread, post it below. I will then add it to this post with a link to the Bitcoin address and its content, along with a brief description.
|
|
|
|
Debt is not slavery. If I borrow money from someone, whether dollars or Bitcoins, I am in debt. But in no way am I a slave, I'm merely obligated to fulfill a voluntary contract. If debt is slavery, so too is employment, ordering chinese food, purchasing insurance, and marriage (some might argue with this last point  Why won't this phrase go away?? Because people like Atlas have never had actual businesses before and don't understand the difference between good debt and bad debt. A debt more than you can afford to lose is bad debt. |
|
|
|
Yougotcoin app on facebook is a scam...  Am I the only one who laughed at the idea of somebody hacking a Bitcoin account for .039 Bitcents then leaving an "awe" message? |
|
|
|
|
Crosby wins.
PM me with your location and I'll send you an invoice.
|
|
|
|
|
They put Facebook in your Bitcoin. It's only going to work with a certain crowd.
1HWrZshbTSDGzuEzobz1ye3UNkf3UGm41u
|
|
|
|
if satoshi is human and humans make mistakes, i think it's possible a large number of his private keys have already been lost permanently.
I've considered that. However, some have speculated quant/s had to be involved. Could this really be the work of one man? Perhaps this group knew exactly what was going to happen. Under such a scenario, such carelessness could not have happened. The coins have not been spent. They might have a purpose. The code has been found to be meticulous. I think we are dealing with some high-level shit here. As for who and what, it's unknowable. Just buy some coins and enjoy the ride. I, for one, thank our influential benefactors. |
|
|
|
if satoshi is human and humans make mistakes, i think it's possible a large number of his private keys have already been lost permanently.
It was self-important enough to create an untraceable identity. I am sure it assigned the same importance to its Bitcoins as well. |
|
|
|
|
Whatever Satoshi is, I think it's certain that it has plans for its amassed fortune related to furthering Bitcoin. It would of spent it by now otherwise, methinks.
It keeps me confident in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
