On Jul 5, 3:10=A0pm, good...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> On Apr 29, 7:16 am, Zee <jonZ...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Apr 29, 6:38 am, "Mark" <alln...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:>
"Dari=
o Western" <dariowest...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> > >news:xgvRj.5927$ko5.4426@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > > > Trent,
>
> > > > Why did you post this message to a wrestling and Mormon newsgroup?
=
=A0>
>
> > > Why did YOU??
>
> > because once evolving from a primate to a human being..;if that is
> > possible....the first discovery is that the most hate that can be
> > conjured up is a group of people or peer group that will not admit
> > their evil....the evil itself is not unaceptable to the m***** but the
> > denial of it is unacceptable...ref...pastor wright and obama...the
> > militant terrorist suicide bombers fighting for destruction of
> > everyone but their kind.....stalin...hitler...etc.....does anyone
> > think that hitler or stalin would ever repent....it is the
> > unrelentling attitude of the ****ist that is prevalent and their overt
> > desires to aggress and force their ****dness on the rest of
> > society....Dario is cut from the same cloth that Anna Nikki and i are
> > cut from ..knowing that our beliefs are not popular and know exactly
> > how the non ****d feel and why....but you primates until you evolve
> > and admit willneverknow.....jz
>
> The Jewish, Hindu, Muslim, and Hari-Krishna beliefs are not popular,
> but in a free world, they have a right to practice them. =A0Most non
> Hari-Krishnas likely don't relish seeing the Hari Krishnas walking
> down the street and chanting and doing their dance, but it is the Hari-
> Krishna's Just right, and Just Freedom to do so. =A0****dness is not
> being "forced" on anyone by merely walking down the street. =A0Unless
> your person or property is violated (or endangered), nothing is being
> forced on you, and you have a Just right to Freedom whether you
> "jon_zee," and other Americans, and other people throughout the world
> recognize it or not, you have a Just right to Freedom unless you are
> violating (or endangering) someone's persons or property including
> public property, or engaged in commerce, which given the exploitative
> nature of which may Justly be regulated, though not prohibited,
> through product bundling, quality controls, and advertising
> regulations, and possibly though not surely other ways I have not
> thought of.
>
> Thus, you surely have the Just right to commit non-dangerous, non-
> commercial acts in public. =A0This is Freedom. =A0The line may not be
> drawn more strictly than this, or must we violate the principle of
> Freedom entirely and may as well do away with it, leaving the future
> to a single prevailing ideology and religion, limiting all speeches
> and actions to those of the past, for certainly once something is
> outlawed it would be extinct and nearly impossible to gain a majority
> sup****t for since they would not even be able to try or see or
> practice it at all. =A0Save the argument I am presenting here, and such
> is our current oppressed state.
>
> The only thing I think about "Anna" is that perhaps she is denigrating
> *** and promoting non***ual ****ity =A0in an attempt to protect****ism
> from the anti-*** bigots and persecutors in this world. =A0I don't know
> if such a tactic is well founded, but she seems maybe too much a voice
> of the prejudice Nazi crowd to seriously be taking such a tactic.
>
> Leave your dress and conduct codes to private property owners who may
> eject any who violate them. =A0No country may be called free which could
> require you to wear a Burka in public, but apparently that is a
> possibility requiring only 50% of the voters in the United States (or
> less than 50% as the minority of elected dictators can pass the law).
> Thus we see, Democracy is merely a means of political change, and
> Freedom from past governance, but that it is in no way an
> establishment or ensurer of Freedom. =A0Freedom is a principle much more
> im****tant than Democracy, it is a principle to be both advanced in the
> minds of the people of this planet, and established in the foundations
> of any Just political system which governs them. =A0The United States is
> one of the biggest human rights violators on the planet due to its
> disregard for Freedom in areas of drugs, arms, and ***. =A0It has not
> been the bastion of Freedom it was supposedly conceived to be.
> American's Just rights and thus their prosperity, wealth, and
> livelihood are violated all over the country - as cities may
> apparently legally do thing such as ban the drinking of beer on the
> beach - taking the common citizen's wealth and prosperity, and taxing
> them to spend more money policing and jailing offenders. =A0Such is the
> despotic state of the tyranny of our nation today. =A0As seen with the
> drug war this vicious cycle increases true crime, undermines the
> justice system, and leads to more lawlessness and criminal
> lifestyles. =A0The USA puts more people in prison per capita than any
> nation in the world besides China, and thinks to call itself free
> compared to such fallen Communist Empires and Theocracies which may
> respect neither free speech nor freedom of religion, nor the rights of
> the accused - nor the right to acquire property, and may even force
> people to work like slaves - though I'm not sure how things work/
> worked in communist countries. =A0And of those rights, none at all are
> protected by Democracy, they all are protected by the insufficient
> Constitution (specifically the Bill of Rights) which requires 2/3rd's
> of both houses of Congress and 3/4th's of all state's legislatures to
> change, and neither does it protect your right to property as taxes
> could be raised to 100% and the nation made Communist. =A0Allying
> yourself with a lesser evil may make sense at times, but the truth is
> you wish to see both evils fall or be corrected - we can only hope for
> the nation's sake the latter comes to pass.
>
> So the nation's not free, and to the extent it is free, it is not free
> because of Democracy but because of the Bill of Rights. =A0Democracy
> does not ensure Freedom, it is merely a means of political change.
> Democracy is merely a means of freeing ourselves from the dictators
> who ruled us in the past and electing new dictators without having to
> resort to war. =A0The Bill of Rights ensures Freedom and is either not
> recognized or not extensive enough.
>
> There are 5 means of political change:
>
> 1. Free Speech - if it is allowed
> 2. Democracy - if your country has it
> 3. Civil Disobedience - if the penalties are not too harsh - sucks
> nonetheless as you can be penalized
> 4. Targeted Assassinations
> 5. War - nearly always civil war
>
> As you can see, Free Speech and Democracy are the most palatable.
> Free Speech and Democracy allow us to change the government without
> war by appealing to the rulers or replacing them. =A0The other three
> methods cost lives but are sometimes necessary.
>
> And those who violate minority freedom are prejudice evil lying
> bigots, doing satanism and sin, jacking for nothing, taking people's
> unalienable freedoms away.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Democracy is just an elected dictator****p. The elected
representatives are no better than any old dictators, and will oppress
you just as much as any old dictator. The only difference in America
is the Bill of Rights which is protected by the separation of powers
in the structure of our government between the judicial and executive/
legislative branches of government and the separation of power between
the Federal, State, County and City governments. Democracy does not
ensure freedom it is merely a means of political change of freedom
from the past dictators who may free us from past legislation.
If common dictators were constrained by a bill of rights protected by
a separation of powers, their country would be nearly as good as any
other government or Democracy with such freedoms, they would just lack
the means of political change. And a good king or dictator could self-
constrain but the next king or dictator could easily be not as good.
For instance China too has a bill of rights and more guaranteed
freedoms in its Constitution than the United States. But with no
separation of powers, its Dictators can ignore the guaranteed freedoms
completely and override them and routinely do.
It's true that in some states a majority can get an issue on the
ballot and pass a law in an election. But most laws are passed by an
elected minority. So much touting Democracy as freedom, when we do
not even have a Democracy. In any case, majority rule can be tyranny
to the other 49% of the voters, and so the theory goes, that a wise
minority of rulers might be elected. But rather as it turns out they
are just dictatorial tyrants, it seems a broader bill of rights and a
broader interpretation of a bill of rights is a better solution.
I'm the wise minority who would respect broader freedoms if elected.
In the absence of a bill of rights securing our freedom, tyranny is
given free reign. Justice is not established or at least it is not
secured - as the next elected dictator may legislate tyranny. Sin
instead becomes established as the government makes up new sins, and
commits evil upon the people in the name of righteousness.
Dictatorial tyrants spend their time establi****ng murder instead of
Justice. It's a question of tyranny of the majority vs. minority
rights, or majority rule vs. tyranny of the minority.
|
