Well, the whole “In 1950, housewives will blah blah blah” thingy is really starting to rub me the wrong way. Just… quit it, will you?
I’m not even sure which side you’re making fun of.
At least this thread is intellectually stimulating! 
Wow. You had quite a long coma. Welcome back! 
I don’t mean to hijack this thread, but Brutus, while I tend to disagree with your politics and outlook on life, I’ve been meaning to say this for a while: Your location is absolutely genius. Also, this post had me ROFL.
As to the subject at hand, I’m not one of Lib’s biggest fans, but there are worse people on the board, that’s for sure. He’s generally a pretty decent guy. Lay off till he says or does something that’s actually stupid.
While I can’t honestly say that I think your criticisms of Lib are completely unfair or inaccurate, I also can’t say that he really deseveres a roasting. Let’s face it, this board in general and GD in particular wouldn’t be the same without him. He’s a part of the neighborhood. The most I could fault him for would be an occasional tendency towards overemotional response, and who among us hasn’t been guilty of that? (Translation: I have been incredibly guilty of it myself.) Besides, it’s not like the guy’s mean-spirited or cruel, and I think that’s enough to earn anyone forgiveness for far worse sins.
That running housewife gag did drag on a bit too long, though!
I should add that was once highly prejudiced against political libertarians, not on strictly ideological grounds but because all the ones I’d ever met in real life were irresponsible, selfish losers with substance abuse problems. Really. So if for nothing else I must appreciate Lib for providing the counterexample I needed to help break myself of that prejudice.
You know, for someone whose username is the same as my political identification, me and Lib seem to get into it alot. He’s always on the “god” thing lately, and not so much on the “liberty” thing. Maybe it’s just the style of debates that have come off lately.
However, Lib occasionally comes up with something pretty clever, that makes me reanalyze my opinions and look deeper into my contentions. He may come off cocky, but don’t we all? I mean, nobody ever held a belief they thought was wrong, we all have our reasons. Most of us bend over backwards to show that our beliefs can be changed, for fear of being labelled intransigent, but Lib just skips that part and tells it like he sees it. A little hedging here and there, a little switch to a new set of tracks once and awhile, but isn’t the evolution of our belief a good thing?
Anyways, I may be sick of that “modal ontological proof” of his, and I think we’ve been down that road plenty of times by now, but he’s pretty OK when he’s not talking about that subject.
I just wish I didn’t have to be the only outspoken athiest libertarian on this board 
Well, you know, Rex, if you would help out in threads like this one, I wouldn’t get gang raped so much and could spend more time on libertarianism and less time on theology. I hardly ever see you in the libertarianism debate threads.
no
I would like to have expressed my views on this topic, but unfortunately this is not the appropriate forum for the kind of words I would like to use; my response may therefore be found here.
All I can say is that it’s about time someone took Libertarian to task for all his faults and foibles.
As a poster in Great Debates I am never overzealous in defending my stance, and I am always and gracious and courteous. My logic is always pure and unassailable.
The one thing I never ever do is talk down to people and act superior or arrogant no matter how stupid and ignorant elucida… err my opponent might be.
Libertarian on the other hand does not match my perfection, often being testy or wrong and sometimes both. It is unsufferable to suggest that I as well as everybody else who always agrees with me should have to put up with this.
Thank you for bringing this topic up, Vorlon.
Faced now with the damning proof of his fallibility and false arrogance Libertarian will now know that he does not belong in the rarified intellectual air of us infallible and humble master debaters.
Maybe he can spend more time in MPSIMS writing about his favorite pony until he attains his Doctorate, then he can go to Tibet, study under the Dalai Lhama until he attains humble enlightenment. At such a time it is possible that he may be ready to speak with the likes of you and me.
I sincerely hope that Libertarian does not take this too hard and rip out his hair or pluck his eyes from his head in despair and shame.
You and I Vorlon are not an easy standard to live up to.
What is a Libertarian?
:
:
So, this is some odd hybrid between a very badly-implemented “let’s you and him fight!” attempt and a dysfunctional Valentine’s?
Odd. Well, whatever works for you.
I like Libertarian and appreciate having him around. Admittedly, he isn’t always patient, and sometimes overly in love with the positions he takes, which I pointed out in another thread, but he’s a smart guy, knows a lot more about logic than I do (even though I still think there’s something wrong with that ontological proof) and I think he’s a real asset to the boards. I only regret I don’t know him personally (and I feel bad about what he did to Brutus’s neighbor’s cat, but that’s another story.
Besides, I guess it can be good to have a passionate person debating something. It reminds us just how powerful and engaging to the soul ideas can be.
Am I the only one who actually liked those comments? At least they were a bit more inventive than “when come back bring pie” and “my cat’s brath smells like cat food”.
Did you just make those up, or were they from a list of science fiction ideas that didn’t come true or something like that? If they were, where can I find that list?
What, you already stopped it and I didn’t notice?
Unfair person.
I’m slightly annoyed by the fact that Lib will switch the topic of any debate - any debate - to something involving coercion, modal logic, why God is Love or the inherent intellectual dishonesty of materialism. Or preferably several of the topics.
But sheesh, this thread is just petty. Hmpf.
I don’t think you used quite enough sarcasm. It needs to be more biting, with a ragged edge and some pithy puns if you can manage it.
Somebody call Norris M[sup]c[/sup]Whirter!
I think we may have a new world record for the smallest set of people ever to have been labelled ‘everyone’.