1. Changelog 1.161

    Hello Queens and Kings,
    The update to 1.161 will take place on Wed, Sept 18, 2019. There will be a short period of downtime during the update, we apologize for any inconvenience caused during this time.
    For the detailed description of the upcoming changes, please see the details here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. GvG Improvements Update

    Hello Queens and Kings,
    First up, we wanted to thank you once again for taking the time to continue to contribute your feedback on the upcoming changes to Forge of Empires, especially in relation to Guild Battlegrounds.
    For the detailed description of the upcoming changes, please see the details here.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice

vote your conscience not your wallet

Discussion in 'Debate Hall' started by yee yee boy, Jul 22, 2019.

  1. cton2.forge

    cton2.forge Active Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2018
    DUDE - I've known people like this!

    Funny story, I got stuck with a bunch of Navy personnel in Afghanistan for a year and being the silly grunt I was I got tasked to run a weapons range every so often (which, as it turned out, was not altogether that helpful). Long story short I've never seen so many negligent discharges in my life. I DO NOT FEEL SAFE AROUND NAVY PEOPLE. Good people, just scary when they have guns!
     
    BlackSand the Sly likes this.
  2. cton2.forge

    cton2.forge Active Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2018

    Hmmm.

    "That Government is best which governs least"
    - Thoreau

    Minimalism. Stay out of my stuff!
     
  3. Emberguard

    Emberguard Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2018
    The title is vote with your conscience not your wallet. If we can’t discuss what makes our conscience tick (morals and beliefs) then it’s a misleading title

    sounds nice in theory. Though a lot of laws exist because of things going wrong and needing arbitration of some kind
     
    anyempire and 22prentwil like this.
  4. Super Catanian

    Super Catanian Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2018
    My apologies, I meant the part where you said that religion has been a part of politics for a long time (history).
     
    Emberguard likes this.
  5. 22prentwil

    22prentwil Active Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2019
    So you want to take an example from Somalia?

    Utopia doesn’t exist you know.
     
  6. cton2.forge

    cton2.forge Active Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2018
    I'll take Thoreau over 22prentwil. And if you want to skip over to Thomas Moore let me know we can go that way too
     
  7. lannister the rich

    lannister the rich Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2019
    Ah Thoreau, one of the greatest neck beards of history
     
    cton2.forge and freshmeboy like this.
  8. Stephen Longshanks

    Stephen Longshanks Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    The fact that someone famous says something does not necessarily make it true.
     
  9. lannister the rich

    lannister the rich Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2019
    Well, he was a bit of an anarchist, but he also acknowledged that we aren’t ready to be governed by nothing and pushed for a better government instead
     
    anyempire likes this.
  10. cton2.forge

    cton2.forge Active Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2018
    True. But just because 22prentwil says something doesn't make it so either. Or Stephen Longshanks. Or Cton. And tones of self-assured righteousness.... Well we'll stop there. I'll take Emerson or Thoreau over some maniac on our forums....
     
  11. 22prentwil

    22prentwil Active Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2019
    Well, nobody can change your beliefs, but it’s hard to imagine that you can look at countries with a lack of government (understanding what goes on there) and believe that that’s the best option.

    But if you want to believe past quotes over present day evidence, well go ahead.

    But you haven’t yet given any evidence to support your point besides the quotes of past anarchists.
     
  12. Stephen Longshanks

    Stephen Longshanks Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    And I'll take the truth, regardless of who says it, over an untruth (or unsubstantiated opinion, like the Thoreau quote) any day.
     
    anyempire and 22prentwil like this.
  13. BlackSand the Sly

    BlackSand the Sly Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2018
    I spent 7 years in the military and have a lifetime CAC permit (free for some veterans in my state). I also have a range membership at the local long and tactical range.

    I understand your sentiments completely.

    But ... To what extent would you be prepared to relinquish your rights in order to account for the actions of others?

    I went as far as getting a NICS number and all the required permits. I have had situational training and conditioning (regularly). There are times I don’t let friends and neighbors carry on my own property.

    It would be easy for me to turn my head and say nothing when the goverment starts messing with the rights of gun owners, because I know they will never make it impossible for someone like me to own firearms. I can pass whatever requirements they want to use. I can afford whatever costs they want to impose in order to restrict a gun owner’s liberty to carry whatever they want. They will never give up their rights (security) the same as they will freely restrict the liberties of others.

    I commented in thread because I simply recognized government limits freedom and liberty.

    So why do I care ... Because I am not everyone’s mama, and don’t intend to grant the Federal Government the power to be your mama because some dumbass does stupid things.

    I stopped trying to fix the world more than a decade ago ... The military taught me adaptation and innovation will always win the race. It is generally the degree to which we agree to restrict ourselves, that will eventually defeat us.
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2019
  14. Stephen Longshanks

    Stephen Longshanks Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    Interesting. I'm guessing you don't see how this refutes every other argument you make.
     
  15. RazorbackPirate

    RazorbackPirate Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2018
    I don't see how it does. Please explain how you think it does.
     
  16. Stephen Longshanks

    Stephen Longshanks Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    It's pretty clear, but I'll help you out. For her own security, she takes away the freedoms of her friends and neighbors. The very thing she is arguing should never be done. And it's actually even worse than that. The friends and neighbors have zero representation in the decision, whereas with the government it is people elected by us making the decisions, so we do have representation. (Even though it doesn't work out as well as it should.)
     
  17. freshmeboy

    freshmeboy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2017
    Just a moment Mr. Longshanks. There is a vast difference between constitutional rights on public property versus private property. I, too, do not allow neighbors, hunters , the police, county sheriffs or anybody else the right to carry firearms on my property without my consent or a warrant if it is indeed justified. The reason is simple. It's my land and my rights as the owner trump yours as a citizen. You have the right to free speech too. But not on my property. The right to move freely across the country. But not on my property.
    I respect your rights-all of them- as a citizen but only when you stand on public property or your own home. The founders made it so that every man's home, no matter how small, is his castle and it is inviolate without cause. I struggle with defending my rights from the powers that be and I spend too much time educating locals who deem their second amendment rights superior to my rights of ownership.
    It's an ugly battle that has caused bad blood between some of my neighbors and myself, and its unfortunate that those who would demand their rights the loudest would try to deprive me of mine....
     
  18. Stephen Longshanks

    Stephen Longshanks Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    I don't disagree with that, but @BlackSand the Sly's point is that there is never a justification for restricting someone's rights/freedoms in the name of security, so her acknowledgement that she ignores her own point when it comes to her own security refutes that.
     
  19. cton2.forge

    cton2.forge Active Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2018
    I know you like to read between the lines and only see what you want to see. I'm not talking anarchy at all. Or a complete lack of any oversight whatsoever. THAT government (that sort of means that there is one) is best which governs least (which means they are doing something not a complete lack of action).

    Lemme break it down for you - over-regulation by governments is counter-productive to progress and can be very detrimental to most members of society (see Communist Russia, fascist governments etc).

    I barely understand taxes. Before you go running off at the mouth, the Internal Revenue Code is over 7,500 pages long. There are currently over 20,000 laws regarding firearms. From 2000 to 2007 Congress created 452 new crimes bring the total number of Federal crimes to 4,450. The sad truth is no one knows just how many laws there are. Estimates put the number between 15,000 and upwards of 50,000.

    What in the heck? If you can name 1,000 laws, kudos to you. If you can't, maybe it means our current system is overworked and underwhelming.

    "It is currently estimated that the average American commits at least a dozen felonies a day"
     
    Godly Luke and RazorbackPirate like this.
  20. Stephen Longshanks

    Stephen Longshanks Forum Moderator

    Joined:
    May 8, 2015
    Once again, this is merely an opinion, not a fact. Quotes from famous people may be fun, but they don't mean anything without real world data to back them up.
     

Top