[QUOTE=marcmcroy]
Do statutes against murder keep them from killing do statutes against theft keep them from stealing. So you now have laws against so many things .what has laws kept from happening May I ask? Please dont be afraid
[/QUOTE]
As a person from a family of liars, cheats’ and thieves; and being a reformed criminal myself, yes statutes do make a difference. More of my family would be on the streets robbing and conning people if it weren’t for various rules against such acts.
Why do you continue to do your arguments a disservice by spouting ridiculous arguments about maters that have been settled in fact.
What’s next-- your view on 9/11, Flight 800?
No response to this? Okay.
Fine. Leave the club’s premises and you will be free of the club’s rules.
Apollo moon landing hoax.
I want to be a free man on the moon.
I have been puzzling over this and fail to see its relevance to the thread topic. Can anyone explain what this has to do with being free, sovereign whatever, and the temperature of spit in Topeka?
Because they’re the same thing.
Yes, you are difficult to read. Notice how many people have commented they thought you were making anti-Hispanic insults. We invented punctuation to make text easier to read. Try using more of it.
A fetus in the first trimester isn’t a human being. That’s why it’s called a fetus and not a person. I would have thought a sovereign citizen would understand the importance of such a distinction in terminology.
Don’t do things you don’t approve of. If you don’t like murder then a reasonable first step is don’t kill other people. If you don’t approve of abortion then don’t get one.
A moral man doesn’t need rules… but most people need a LOT of them. Locks keep “honest” people honest. Laws delineate the boundaries and makes it easier for everyone to stay inside the lines.
The only thing I’m afraid of here is getting a stitch in my side from laughing so hard at you.
No, it’s not. It’s not a law at all, it’s a list of ideals from the UN.
The Declaration of Independence was never a document delineating law, nor was it ever intended to be. It wasn’t philosophy, it was a declaration of rebellion against the British Empire which then had to be enforced with guns and blood.
I think your “Declarationism” is a very bad idea and I am opposed to it.
FMOTL burn brightly but quickly. We cannot slow their journey, only enjoy the view.
Punctuation wouldn’t have helped with SPLC/splc. Reading would be the cure, there.
Nope. We’re more into spelling. For example, it’s y’all.
The real irony is that the one and only effect of the “freeman on the land” movement is to decrease the freedom of their members. Consider me, for instance: I can come and go wherever and whenever I please. If I want to go down the street to my mom’s house or across the ocean to the land of my ancestors, I can do it. I can pursue any job I want, and when I land one, I can use the money I get from it to buy a wide variety of things. The only cost I pay for this is that I have to give a very small percentage of what I earn to the government, and I have to be nice to other people (which I would have done anyway). All told, I’m pretty free. If other people were to say they wanted a life like mine, I’d understand entirely.
But the Freeman on the Land doesn’t want to pay that very small price, declaring instead that any encroachment on his freedom whatsoever is intolerable. And what is the outcome of this? Instead of a small encroachment on his freedom, he gets a near-total loss of it. He’s free to move anywhere in a 10’ by 10’ cell, and to converse with anyone within the range of his shouting. He eats what the jailers serve him, sleeps where and when the jailers tell him, and has almost no opportunity for self-betterment. Rather than allowing the law to protect his freedom, he has instead forced the law to remove his freedom.
No. Force of government with the approval of the masses makes such force insurmountable, though. That’s all that matters.
Attica! Attica!!
Shhh. I was poking.
True. This is the bottom line reality. Stop trying to find some magic words in the Constitution or legal code or Black’s Law Dictionary that will give you the power. Those magic words don’t exist. If you’re waiting for the government to give your permission to be a Free Man, it’s never going to happen.
If you really want to be a Free Man, just go ahead and do it. Just decide you’re an outlaw and declare you’re not bound by any laws other than your own. Stop asking the government to give you independence and just take it for yourself.
The upside is you’ll have finally come up with a logically consistent program. The downside is you’re going to lose and maybe die in the process. You can declare your independence but the government isn’t going to recognize it. And you’re outnumbered three hundred million to one. The first time you there’s a disagreement between you and the United States, you’ll be squished like an ant.
I was going to say that with a join date of June 2013 that I bet we won’t see him in July 2013 but I think that after post #114 I’m too late.
Yes, if by “ward of the state” you mean that I’m bound by the laws that make up this country. Most laws are good, some laws are bad, and if I disagree with any there are avenues to dispute those laws. A moral person may rule themselves, but there is no assurance that anybody is moral, nor is a moral person a competent person, an intelligent person, an ambitious person, or a reasonable person. Laws help to skew persons towards morality by force, because most people, even if they are moral, may not be those other things.
Rules helped people to do the right thing, and whether you agree with it or not, you need those rules. Otherwise, nothing compels you to do right. And if you object to that, tell me, what compels me to be moral to you? The law, that’s what. And believe it or not, statutes against murder and stealing make a different. I guarantee you that without those laws, I will be murdering and stealing, and there is nothing you can do about it. So count your blessings that those statutes exist.
I’m not going to try to convince you that I’m right and that you need to be a ward of the state. Instead, I’ll simply say that you’re arguing for immoral people. If you fancy yourself moral, then these laws do not affect you. If you’re immoral, then these laws need to be in place so you can be punished. Therefore, the laws are good, are moral, and are necessary. What you consider bad laws I consider the only thing stopping you from harming me. For that reason, you cannot have all your freedoms
Now you’ve done it, scared him away. Just when he was getting interesting.
Sorry. I need to work on my game.
MAN OVERBOARD . . . err, man overboard, man over board or man bored over?
(If this joke makes no sense, count yourself lucky!)
CMC fnord!