Terry I ramble, and lose track of my own thoughts, and worse my ride said time to go so I spit out a reply that obviously made little sense. :)
My point is, if I can gain enuff clerity from my morning coffee to put it out here for you, is that a pragmatic approach to moving forward towards greater libertey is not an initiation of force. A pragmatist is not forcing you to support his ideas on how to move forward, and if he is holding true to liberty, his moves are not to usurp liberties, but to dismantel the unesesary funtions of the state in a slow, thought out manner, so as to not cause undue injustices to those already interwoven in the system as it can not be changed in a blink of an eye to the ideal wich you undoubtedly understand. To advocate decriminalizing possession and personal use of marajuana first and test the waters and identify potential problems that could come from decriminalizing all drugs, rather than jump in head first to decriminalizing the sale and import of opium is not an initiation of force, it is a point of view. It is not agression, it promotes an increase to liberty, a reduction of state control, and further more being more politicaly palitable it is more likley to succede in the future. Your little blurb, to me implies that one who merely holds that point of view, is in your eyes an evil coruptor of all you hold dear and by your words demonized and I find it inapropriate. You have a right to say it, I am just exercising mine to say that I don't. I hope I am clear enuff =( --- In [email protected], "Terry L Parker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > UncoolRabbit, you sure as hell need some 'rethought' imo :) > > Some of what you refer to as 'confilct' with NAP is not. You > apparently do NOT understand that the physical aggression truce > principle at libertarianism's core is OPPOSED to environmental > pollution. The rest of what you said in garbled manner also does NOT > conflict with UNIVERSAL libertarianism. Please think and speak > clearly on this matter. > > So AGAIN, what would you advocate as cause to initiate, or do a > credible threat to initiate, physical force against an innocent > person or their justly held possesession? > > > -Terry Liberty Parker > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian > > > > --- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit" <uncoolrabbit@> > wrote: > > > > I want to force others to not force things on others Terry. I have > > the belief, perhaps deranged who knows, that we are not Angels, and > > I believe you know the Madison quote. > > > > I believe there is a role for limited goverment, and part of it > > should be using the credible initiation of force to prevent the > > initiation of force, as oxymoronic as that must sound. Further more > > I believe that there are many real issues, such as enviromental > > protection vs anarcho-captilism that are a real conflicting issue > in > > the NAP/ZAP world of theory as both sides can argue it is the other > > initiating force against them. These cases mean that, for a true > > philosophical triumph the philosophy needs to be rethought. > > > > --- In [email protected], "Terry L Parker" <txliberty@> > > wrote: > > > > > > Uncoolrabbit, hate's got nothing to do with it! > > > > > > You seem to be confusing the advocacy of ideals vs advocacy of > > > various implementation approaches. > > > > > > But, I will ask you: what initiation, or credible threat of > > > initiation, of physical force against an innocent person or their > > > justly held possession, do YOU want to advocate? > > > > > > > > > -Terry Liberty Parker > > > 'Real World' experiment in LIBERTARIAN community became famous > > > at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LibertyProspects/message/2569 > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit" > <uncoolrabbit@> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > 'Freedom' to violate you and yours > > > > is at the heart of UNLIMITED 'libertarianism' > > > > > > > > In an apparent attempt to impose > > > > the continuing philosophic idealogy > > > > of extreem libertarianism, there is a push > > > > to demonize the pragmatists who seek real change. > > > > Now that the comfortable obscurity of Libertariansm > > > > has essentially fallen, the banner of 'liberty' becomes > > > > a hijacking target of the 'consistant libertarians.' > > Aggressors > > > who > > > > eagerly want to maintain that only they know what truely > > > is 'liberty' > > > > with no 'exceptions' to what they want to see construed as THE > > > > UNIVERSAL view of libertarianism. > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't hate me Terry :) > > > > > > > > > > ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
