WoW! I got banned from FTL

[J’raxis 270145]

Luke is what we're up against, in the long run. Like most Americans, he believes in "freedom," and hasn't a clue what it really means.

[dalebert]

also from the Constitution that everybody agreed on when the original Confederation became a Constitutional Republic in 1788.

[David]

Luke is what we're up against, in the long run. Like most Americans, he believes in "freedom," and hasn't a clue what it really means.

I realized this a while back.  Some of the politicians that say freedom is authority really believe that crap.  Or they say it because they think it will be popular around election time. 
It is the reason I am kinda tired of 'outreach', and would rather get those with like minds to try something different.  anarchyhouseproject1.org/home
It is also why I now call myself an anarchist even though I don't really like the word, because it means so many things to so many people. 

[srqrebel]

Okay, I take it back.  Luke is not a troll, he's just brainwashed.

Thank you, Ian!

As far as I can tell, Luke has always conducted himself respectfully on this forum. He has refrained from making put-down comments or calling people names, even when he was (regrettably) subjected to the same.

He is certainly outspoken, but there is nothing wrong with that. In fact, same goes for you and me. I have far more contempt for the vast majority of sheeple who "play it safe" by either refraining from having an opinion, or letting others do their thinking for them.

At least there is hope for those of us who have opinions, and know the basis for our opinions, even when those opinions turn out to be dead wrong!

[srqrebel]

As for your question about where government derives its authority to govern, I believe that government derives its authority from its ability to protect the rights to life, liberty, and property of its citizens...

...yet it has demonstrated no such ability. In fact, quite the contrary: It's agents routinely destroy more "life, liberty, and property" than any other subset of individuals. While the supermajority of people earn their livings honestly by producing marketable values (voluntarily purchased products and services), and wouldn't have it any other way, the agents of the government sustain themselves by extortion and plunder, maintaining their parasitic existence through an ever present Mafia-like threat of force.

...and in the case of the US, also from the Constitution that everybody agreed on when the original Confederation became a Constitutional Republic in 1788.

Are you implying that 230 years ago, a few individuals "created" authority out of thin air, which authority somehow mystically exists in its own right, regardless of the desires of any human beings subjected to it?

Was there some secret recipe, whose ingredients the Founding Fathers mixed together with a mortar and pestle to "create" said authority? If not, then what exactly was the source of that "authority", that so fantastically continues to exert "itself" upon us today? Was it the blessing of God that conferred authority upon this piece of paper?

Think about it: If I write up my own constitution, and get a handful of people to sign on to it, does that mean the mechanism created to enforce it upon others, would operate on some inherent authority of its own, independent of the consent of those affected by it? If not, then what is missing?

...or are you saying that any mechanism that effectively protects "life, liberty, and property", automatically has "authority" to insert itself into the lives of anyone who disobeys its dictates, in order to enforce its own agenda? Now that sounds like tyranny to me! Given some competition, it would amount to not only tyranny, but the barbaric chaos of gang warfare. Oh wait... come to think of it... Iran... Iraq... Vietnam... Korea... Cold War... Palestinian occupation... World War II....... nevermind.

Luke, you made a decent attempt at explaining whence the "government" derives its authority... thank you for that Yet the basic question remains inadequately addressed: What is the root source of the presumed authority of the individuals within the government, to impose themselves forcibly upon others? The constitution did not always exist. Does it follow that "authority" can be created at will out of thin air, by anyone with access to a pen and paper? Is "authority" derived from the unanimous consent of all who are subjected to it? Or are certain individuals, perhaps those of us who are more intelligent than the rest, imbued with special rights -- namely the right to create "authority" out of thin air, and impose it by force, if necessary, upon those of lesser intellectual or moral character?

[Tom Sawyer]

Suckin' up to him won't help ya... 

Ohhh yeah, he'd make ya build the wall.

Ignorant of the cultural contributions of cannabis users. First Luke should go burn his CD collection, no jazz, rockin' roll, blues... it would be a much grayer world.

[FTL_Ian]

As far as I can tell, Luke has always conducted himself respectfully on this forum.

I can't agree with this.  You don't respect others by snitching and advocating they be jailed/hurt. 

[Dylboz]

As for your question about where government derives its authority to govern, I believe that government derives its authority from its ability to protect DESTROY the rights to life, liberty, and property of its citizens, and in the case of the US, also from the Constitution that everybody the white, landed, slave-owning elite agreed on when the original Confederation became a Constitutional Republic in 1788.

Fixed.

[J’raxis 270145]

As far as I can tell, Luke has always conducted himself respectfully on this forum.

I can't agree with this.  You don't respect others by snitching and advocating they be jailed/hurt. 

That didn't happen on the forum, though. A minor point.

[J’raxis 270145]

As for your question about where government derives its authority to govern, I believe that government derives its authority from its ability to protect DESTROY the rights to life, liberty, and property of its citizens, and in the case of the US, also from the Constitution that everybody the white, old, male, landed, slave-owning elite agreed on when the original Confederation became a Constitutional Republic in 1788.

Fixed.

Fixed again.

I could also point out to Luke that the Confederation's replacement with that Constitutional Republic wasn't done exactly above-board, either.

[Free libertarian]

As for your question about where government derives its authority to govern, I believe that government derives its authority from its ability to protect DESTROY the rights to life, liberty, and property of its citizens, and in the case of the US, also from the Constitution that everybody the white, old, male, landed, slave-owning elite agreed on when the original Confederation became a Constitutional Republic in 1788.

Fixed.

   ...you forgot "hemp growing" old white guys 

Fixed again.

I could also point out to Luke that the Confederation's replacement with that Constitutional Republic wasn't done exactly above-board, either.

[Dylboz]

As for your question about where government derives its authority to govern, I believe that government derives its authority from its ability to protect DESTROY the rights to life, liberty, and property of its citizens, and in the case of the US, also from the Constitution that everybody the white, old, male, landed, slave-owning elite agreed on when the original Confederation became a Constitutional Republic in 1788.

Fixed.

   ...you forgot "hemp growing" old white guys 

Fixed again.

I could also point out to Luke that the Confederation's replacement with that Constitutional Republic wasn't done exactly above-board, either.

Well, if we're gonna recount all the drugs they used, poppies were well known as "God's own medicine," and until relatively recently, Jefferson's own strain of medicinal poppies were for sale in seed pouches at Monticello, and their blossoms were featured in artistic rendering reproduced on T-shirts and postcards, also for sale there.

[Luke S]

Well I'm back guys, and the first thing I'll do is I'll answer Free Libertarian's question about marijuana offenders who are disabled.

You still haven't told me if we should make wheel chair bound pot smokers build walls along the Mexican border or if George Washington's picture should be taken down from public schools, but I'll let you think on that for a day or two longer.

Marijuana user offenders who are disabled obviously will not be the ones digging the holes, erecting the wall, et. al. All marijuana user offenders who are disabled, as well as all marijuana user offenders who do not live in a border state, will for their community service be assigned to special factories that will be built throughout the US (paid for by marijuana fines), in which the individual sections of the fence will be pre-made by the offenders. The disabled marijuana user offenders will get easy jobs that they can still do regardless of their disability, such as operating the machine that makes the razor wire. Those sorts of  machines are largely able to run themselves, so the actual task will probably consist of cutting off the razor wire whenever there is enough to cover the top of one section of fence, and then carrying it to the next workstation.

Also guys, for the rest of you who've said that you've asked me questions and haven't had them answered, I'm sorry, but there are so many fired off at me that I try to answer as many as I can, but sometimes I miss a few.

[Luke S]

Oh. And of course George Washington's picture shouldn't be taken down. Owning slaves is far worse than growing marijuana, so if he gets by w/o being taken down for the former, then obviously the latter isn't bad enough to get his picture taken down from public schools.

Unless it were to be taken down because all the public schools that it is located in are themselves being taken down. The public school system is an abject failure and a waste of our tax money. It should be utterly abolished.

[Dylboz]

What is morally wrong with smoking marijuana? Or is it OK to have laws against things and punish people for committing acts that are not morally wrong and do not hurt anyone?