John,
Obviously I am also interested in discussing problems with our
country, especially stemming from its administration. That is why
I believe it is worth finding solutions. But I believe finding
solutions requires specific identification of the problems and
their sources/causes. It is all in the name of understanding the
problem and finding the best solution that I disagree with your
point, so I explain/rebut. That is the "game" I am "playing". I
now disagree with your latest characterization of your
contradiction, as "two unrelated points" that "can both be true".
Environmental laws can not both help and harm equally; I agree
with the Libertarian explanation of why they harm much more than
they help - I don't believe I am playing a kid's game by doing
this, especially on a Libertarian forum. I also believe my
efforts deserve way more respect and way less ridicule from you,
especially since our intentions are the same and only differ in
details.
-Mark
************
{American jurors have complete Constitutional authority to vote
"not guilty" based on nothing more than a disagreement with the
case, no matter the evidence - despite the judge's instructions.
There is absolutely no obligation to vote "guilty" to arrive at a
unanimous verdict. Get on a jury, stand your ground, and fulfill
its other main purpose: to counteract abusive government and
unjust lawsuits.
See www.fija.org
[Please adopt this as your own signature.] }
-----------------------
Mark;
You seem to be stuck in an either-or/one-or-the-other mindset.
Here is a
wake up for you; two unrelated points can both be true.
Debate? No. You want to play, and I am far too old to be behaving
like a
kid. I'll leave that up to you. Besides, you are not able to
discuss only
debate.....a game for certain. I believe in facts, not contests.
Your country is dying and you want to play games. Pity.
On 6/21/06, mark robert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> John,
>
> But didn't you just deny that position (that weakening
> environmental laws endangers the country)? It appears you
started
> off supporting it, then denied it, but now are supporting it
> again.
>
> OTOH, your denial pattern is a minor inconsistency compared to
> that of your position, which we can now proceed to better
debate
> since you have made it official.
>
> Besides my earlier rebuttal points about these laws endangering
> our country (by bloating govt size and power and exacerbating
> corruption and oppression), I'll include a few points from the
> LP's page I linked earlier.
> ::::::::::::::::::::::::
> Government, both federal and local, is the greatest single
> polluter in the U.S. This polluter literally gets away with
> murder because of sovereign immunity.
> By turning to government for environmental protection, we've
> placed the fox in charge of the hen house.
> Unfortunately, government's stewardship over our land is
> gradually destroying it.
> ::::::::::::::::::::::::
>
> There is a second part to that article at:
> http://www.ruwart.com/environ2.lpn.wpd.html
> Here are some more relevant points to consider.
> ::::::::::::::::::::::::
> Libertarians would privatize land and beast to save endangered
> species, etc.
> Libertarians reject the initiation of physical force as a means
> to their ends.
> Restitution is the remedy.
> Our air (and water) can be protected from pollution with
> restitution and private ownership.
>
>
> -Mark
>
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Yahoo! Groups gets a make over. See the new email design.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/XISQkA/lOaOAA/yQLSAA/KlSolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
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/
