Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Obama wants us to be forced to vote

Page 4 of 6 [ 88 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Dillogic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,339

21 Mar 2015, 9:11 pm

Lintar wrote:
Ah hell, I don't even believe in 'democracy' anyway. It's mob rule, ... .


Democracy is mob rule. :P



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,795
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

21 Mar 2015, 9:21 pm

luan78zao wrote:
There is no aspect of life which "progressives" don't want to control. If only the right orders could be given, they think, what a paradise we'd have! Let's see, how would such a law actually be enforced? The police are surely busy enough – you know, dealing with actual crimes – so I suppose we'll be hiring millions of election police. Will they come to your home and drag you to the polls at gunpoint? Or will there merely be fines, penalties, and prison after the fact?

(First convict, waiting on a bench: "I robbed a bank, what you guys in for?"
Second convict: "Mother-rapin'."
Third convict: "Father-rapin'."
Fourth convict: "I overslept on Election Day and didn't vote.")

AspieUtah wrote:
Only if such a plan would include a "Two Minutes Hate." After all, we might as well fully embrace Orwell if we shift to mandatory elections.


That about covers it.


I think conservatives could be accused of wanting to control people's lives, too. The abortion issue, denying freedom to marry to gays, as well as past abuses such as telling people where they could eat, defecate, or drink fountain water, all based on skin color. The right can be blamed with many instances with controlling the lives of others.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


luan78zao
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 490
Location: Under a cat

21 Mar 2015, 9:31 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
I think conservatives could be accused of wanting to control people's lives, too. The abortion issue, denying freedom to marry to gays, as well as past abuses such as telling people where they could eat, defecate, or drink fountain water, all based on skin color. The right can be blamed with many instances with controlling the lives of others.


Who said anything about conservatives?

Do you still think that "conservative" and "progressive" are the only two options?

Those who want to ban abortion or gay marriage, and any actual person you can find who wants to bring back Jim Crow laws, are also wrong.


_________________
"We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission – which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force." – Ayn Rand


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

21 Mar 2015, 10:39 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
luan78zao wrote:
There is no aspect of life which "progressives" don't want to control. If only the right orders could be given, they think, what a paradise we'd have! Let's see, how would such a law actually be enforced? The police are surely busy enough – you know, dealing with actual crimes – so I suppose we'll be hiring millions of election police. Will they come to your home and drag you to the polls at gunpoint? Or will there merely be fines, penalties, and prison after the fact?

(First convict, waiting on a bench: "I robbed a bank, what you guys in for?"
Second convict: "Mother-rapin'."
Third convict: "Father-rapin'."
Fourth convict: "I overslept on Election Day and didn't vote.")

AspieUtah wrote:
Only if such a plan would include a "Two Minutes Hate." After all, we might as well fully embrace Orwell if we shift to mandatory elections.


That about covers it.


I think conservatives could be accused of wanting to control people's lives, too. The abortion issue, denying freedom to marry to gays, as well as past abuses such as telling people where they could eat, defecate, or drink fountain water, all based on skin color. The right can be blamed with many instances with controlling the lives of others.


Civil rights as they have become known have never been a plank in the conservaive political platform. Liberals, on the other hand, dote on civil rights except for things they don't like which comes of as hypocritical.


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,795
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

22 Mar 2015, 12:39 am

luan78zao wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I think conservatives could be accused of wanting to control people's lives, too. The abortion issue, denying freedom to marry to gays, as well as past abuses such as telling people where they could eat, defecate, or drink fountain water, all based on skin color. The right can be blamed with many instances with controlling the lives of others.


Who said anything about conservatives?

Do you still think that "conservative" and "progressive" are the only two options?

Those who want to ban abortion or gay marriage, and any actual person you can find who wants to bring back Jim Crow laws, are also wrong.


Well, yes, I typically think of the American divide as being between progressives (or liberals) and conservatives.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,795
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

22 Mar 2015, 12:43 am

Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
luan78zao wrote:
There is no aspect of life which "progressives" don't want to control. If only the right orders could be given, they think, what a paradise we'd have! Let's see, how would such a law actually be enforced? The police are surely busy enough – you know, dealing with actual crimes – so I suppose we'll be hiring millions of election police. Will they come to your home and drag you to the polls at gunpoint? Or will there merely be fines, penalties, and prison after the fact?

(First convict, waiting on a bench: "I robbed a bank, what you guys in for?"
Second convict: "Mother-rapin'."
Third convict: "Father-rapin'."
Fourth convict: "I overslept on Election Day and didn't vote.")

AspieUtah wrote:
Only if such a plan would include a "Two Minutes Hate." After all, we might as well fully embrace Orwell if we shift to mandatory elections.


That about covers it.


I think conservatives could be accused of wanting to control people's lives, too. The abortion issue, denying freedom to marry to gays, as well as past abuses such as telling people where they could eat, defecate, or drink fountain water, all based on skin color. The right can be blamed with many instances with controlling the lives of others.


Civil rights as they have become known have never been a plank in the conservaive political platform. Liberals, on the other hand, dote on civil rights except for things they don't like which comes of as hypocritical.


Yes, yes, we liberals are horrible human beings; we ought to throw away our hypocrisy, and just heartlessly tell people they should be happy that we won't do anything for them.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


luan78zao
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 490
Location: Under a cat

22 Mar 2015, 1:13 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
Well, yes, I typically think of the American divide as being between progressives (or liberals) and conservatives.


Liberal comes from the Latin root liber, freedom. Back when more people had a classical education, a "liberal" was logically enough understood to be someone who believed in maximizing individual freedom. Nobody who begins sentences with 'I think people ought to be forced to …' is entitled to use the term.

(I don't think that increasing the power of the state at the expense of the individual is "progress," either. More like regress to the feudalism of the past. But at least the "progressives" of a century ago had the decency to make up a new label rather than stealing the term "liberal.")

And after years of discussions here, after entire threads discussing a political spectrum of two or more axes, you still think that everybody in the US basically either stands with Obama or stands with the likes of Pat Robertson. This boggles my mind. Tell me, what do you do when you encounter a statement that doesn't jibe with your simple little paradigm? Just blank out? Hum a little tune and wait for it to go away?


_________________
"We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission – which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force." – Ayn Rand


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,795
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

22 Mar 2015, 1:56 am

luan78zao wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Well, yes, I typically think of the American divide as being between progressives (or liberals) and conservatives.


Liberal comes from the Latin root liber, freedom. Back when more people had a classical education, a "liberal" was logically enough understood to be someone who believed in maximizing individual freedom. Nobody who begins sentences with 'I think people ought to be forced to …' is entitled to use the term.

(I don't think that increasing the power of the state at the expense of the individual is "progress," either. More like regress to the feudalism of the past. But at least the "progressives" of a century ago had the decency to make up a new label rather than stealing the term "liberal.")

And after years of discussions here, after entire threads discussing a political spectrum of two or more axes, you still think that everybody in the US basically either stands with Obama or stands with the likes of Pat Robertson. This boggles my mind. Tell me, what do you do when you encounter a statement that doesn't jibe with your simple little paradigm? Just blank out? Hum a little tune and wait for it to go away?


No, I don't believe everyone who disagrees with me stands with Pat Robertson. As I recall, you were the one who had slammed all progressives for trying to force people to do things.
And by the way, federal intervention can and does help with the expansion of freedom. Civil rights, legislation which made life bearable for African Americans, and since then, laws which have done the same for women, gays, and others, happened only because progressives understood that sometimes freedom has to be enforced.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


luan78zao
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 24 Nov 2014
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 490
Location: Under a cat

22 Mar 2015, 4:04 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
No, I don't believe everyone who disagrees with me stands with Pat Robertson.


And yet you often make comments like the above, indicating that you think of everyone who disagrees with you as some sort of conservative. It's exasperating.

Quote:
As I recall, you were the one who had slammed all progressives for trying to force people to do things.


I did, and they do. A desire to force people to do things has been a hallmark of the movement since the beginning.

Quote:
And by the way, federal intervention can and does help with the expansion of freedom. Civil rights, legislation which made life bearable for African Americans, and since then, laws which have done the same for women, gays, and others, happened only because progressives understood that sometimes freedom has to be enforced.


"Freedom has to be enforced"– there's some fine Orwellian language for you. You've got to make people do stuff at gunpoint, otherwise they won't be free.

No, freedom and individual rights often have to be defended, and that is a legitimate purpose of government. ("That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men …") But if you propose to override people's judgement, forcing them to do that which they otherwise would not do, have the decency not to call it "freedom."

You and Obama have taken the most illiberal position possible. You think you know better than other people what they ought to be doing or not doing, and you want to impose your will on them by force. That is authoritarianism. Own it, be honest about it, don't appropriate language which properly belongs to the other side.


_________________
"We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission – which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force." – Ayn Rand


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,795
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

22 Mar 2015, 4:13 pm

luan78zao wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
No, I don't believe everyone who disagrees with me stands with Pat Robertson.


And yet you often make comments like the above, indicating that you think of everyone who disagrees with you as some sort of conservative. It's exasperating.

Quote:
As I recall, you were the one who had slammed all progressives for trying to force people to do things.


I did, and they do. A desire to force people to do things has been a hallmark of the movement since the beginning.

Quote:
And by the way, federal intervention can and does help with the expansion of freedom. Civil rights, legislation which made life bearable for African Americans, and since then, laws which have done the same for women, gays, and others, happened only because progressives understood that sometimes freedom has to be enforced.


"Freedom has to be enforced"– there's some fine Orwellian language for you. You've got to make people do stuff at gunpoint, otherwise they won't be free.

No, freedom and individual rights often have to be defended, and that is a legitimate purpose of government. ("That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men …") But if you propose to override people's judgement, forcing them to do that which they otherwise would not do, have the decency not to call it "freedom."

You and Obama have taken the most illiberal position possible. You think you know better than other people what they ought to be doing or not doing, and you want to impose your will on them by force. That is authoritarianism. Own it, be honest about it, don't appropriate language which properly belongs to the other side.


So, by your reasoning, all civil rights legislation is bad, because they have always come with the promise of government enforcement. You know, when lunch counters had to serve blacks, allow black people and Native Americans to vote - or to even marry whites - or now to allow gays to marry, all because the federal government made it so with force of the law. C'mon, don't tell me you're in that camp which says we can't step on the rights of the intolerant by ensuring the rights of others!


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

22 Mar 2015, 5:44 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
luan78zao wrote:
There is no aspect of life which "progressives" don't want to control. If only the right orders could be given, they think, what a paradise we'd have! Let's see, how would such a law actually be enforced? The police are surely busy enough – you know, dealing with actual crimes – so I suppose we'll be hiring millions of election police. Will they come to your home and drag you to the polls at gunpoint? Or will there merely be fines, penalties, and prison after the fact?

(First convict, waiting on a bench: "I robbed a bank, what you guys in for?"
Second convict: "Mother-rapin'."
Third convict: "Father-rapin'."
Fourth convict: "I overslept on Election Day and didn't vote.")

AspieUtah wrote:
Only if such a plan would include a "Two Minutes Hate." After all, we might as well fully embrace Orwell if we shift to mandatory elections.


That about covers it.


I think conservatives could be accused of wanting to control people's lives, too. The abortion issue, denying freedom to marry to gays, as well as past abuses such as telling people where they could eat, defecate, or drink fountain water, all based on skin color. The right can be blamed with many instances with controlling the lives of others.


Civil rights as they have become known have never been a plank in the conservaive political platform. Liberals, on the other hand, dote on civil rights except for things they don't like which comes of as hypocritical.


Yes, yes, we liberals are horrible human beings; we ought to throw away our hypocrisy, and just heartlessly tell people they should be happy that we won't do anything for them.

So you admit to hypocrisy.......


_________________
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,795
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

22 Mar 2015, 7:40 pm

Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
luan78zao wrote:
There is no aspect of life which "progressives" don't want to control. If only the right orders could be given, they think, what a paradise we'd have! Let's see, how would such a law actually be enforced? The police are surely busy enough – you know, dealing with actual crimes – so I suppose we'll be hiring millions of election police. Will they come to your home and drag you to the polls at gunpoint? Or will there merely be fines, penalties, and prison after the fact?

(First convict, waiting on a bench: "I robbed a bank, what you guys in for?"
Second convict: "Mother-rapin'."
Third convict: "Father-rapin'."
Fourth convict: "I overslept on Election Day and didn't vote.")

AspieUtah wrote:
Only if such a plan would include a "Two Minutes Hate." After all, we might as well fully embrace Orwell if we shift to mandatory elections.


That about covers it.


I think conservatives could be accused of wanting to control people's lives, too. The abortion issue, denying freedom to marry to gays, as well as past abuses such as telling people where they could eat, defecate, or drink fountain water, all based on skin color. The right can be blamed with many instances with controlling the lives of others.


Civil rights as they have become known have never been a plank in the conservaive political platform. Liberals, on the other hand, dote on civil rights except for things they don't like which comes of as hypocritical.


Yes, yes, we liberals are horrible human beings; we ought to throw away our hypocrisy, and just heartlessly tell people they should be happy that we won't do anything for them.

So you admit to hypocrisy.......


I was being sarcastic. I sometimes forget how much goes over the heads of us Aspies.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


equestriatola
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 134,348
Location: Half of me is in the Washington state, the other Los Angeles.

22 Mar 2015, 9:16 pm

Everything has a good side and a bad side; this is what Australia does, as some posters mentioned, but there are, well, those people who won't think before they vote.


_________________
LIONS-STAMPEDERS-ELKS-ROUGHRIDERS-BLUE BOMBERS-TIGER-CATS-ARGONAUTS-REDBLACKS-ALOUETTES

The Canadian Football League - What We're Made Of

Feel free to talk to me, if you wish. :)

Every day is a gift- cherish it!

"A true, true friend helps a friend in need."


cberg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Dec 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,183
Location: A swiftly tilting planet

22 Mar 2015, 9:19 pm

Dillogic wrote:
Lintar wrote:
Ah hell, I don't even believe in 'democracy' anyway. It's mob rule, ... .


Democracy is mob rule. :P



_________________
"Standing on a well-chilled cinder, we see the fading of the suns, and try to recall the vanished brilliance of the origin of the worlds."
-Georges Lemaitre
"I fly through hyperspace, in my green computer interface"
-Gem Tos :mrgreen:


yellowtamarin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Sep 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,763
Location: Australia

22 Mar 2015, 9:58 pm

Quote:
Just ask Australia, where citizens have no choice but to vote.

Yes, ask us. My response would be that compulsory voting is a bad idea!



trollcatman
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Dec 2012
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,919

23 Mar 2015, 1:00 am

I've heard people in Belgium claim that compulsory voting is one of the reasons for the rise of Vlaams Belang, a bunch of reactionaries shunned by all the other parties. People will just do a "f**k you" vote if you force them to vote.