No I have. I recommend you guys find some common ground, rather than chase your tails. You’re talking past each other.
No, we are not.
If neither of you are conceeding any ground and you continue this relentless, “No, I am right, you’re wrong” mentality, then Liberty Student is correct. You may as well just let this argument pass, because it’s going no where and is quite dull.
awesome
No, he is not. There is no “we” involved.
KoB is right that we are all unique snowflakes.
But we are all susceptible to gravity too.
Lies.
You know, I remember reading a blog concerning this debate that was very well done and to the point.
Here it is for those who are interested.
I disabled the link. Don’t do that again.
Rofl. I apologize. [:P]
Though, for debates sake, what’s the issue with a contained link that no one has to click? This seems relevant with the non aggression principle and freedom of speech, if you don’t like my link, don’t click it. Seems a little hypocritical.
On the communist forum they make fun of libretarians for that exact reason.
New thread maybe?
You mean, what is the issue with posting a misleading link?
You don’t have freedom of speech on private property. This isn’t the place to post whatever you like.
People read this forum from work and school. Doing something like that (and having the link mailed out to thread subscribers) isn’t very well thought out. Your cheap laughs may come at the expense of embarrassing someone else.
Communists don’t believe in free speech on their property either.
I think you mean to say that I don’t have freedom of speech on your property, becuase obviously I don’t hold the same requirements for mine.
No, that’s exactly what I wanted to happen. I’m sad that you’re the only one who got rick rolled.
I was having fun reading this thread, but couldn’t think of a worthy reply, when suddenly the grand idea of a fantabulous rickrolling appeared. I guess the great spaghetti monster does endow his faithful subjects with ideas while they’re in an internet cafe 
The premise you just pointed out is entirely subjective. My laughs aren’t cheap if other people find the joke funny as well. In fact, my intention was to lighten a situation (this thread) that had boiled down to basic flaming.
Their philosophy isn’t relevant in this context, I was simply pointing out that they attack our philosophy on the basis that we are hypocritical. [:)]
Maybe you should try explaining it to him in full detail.
Ok. Now try something that has some relevance.
If someone is reported of having a crisis then police go to that person’s house, and they get put at a psyche ward until they are “safe” again. It would be enroaching on another’s property if a Volunteer group came to your house and put you in a straight jacket.
The law in this case exists to stop people from hurting themselves, and give them help so that they will rethink their decision. If someone is suicidal, you call the police on them. Psychatrists and doctors generally do this as well if they suspect that a patient may do something if details of a plan is given.
Got it.
Got it.
I agree his equations or expressions of observed phenomena did not exist before he wrote them down, but the laws governing the expressions did exist before newton.
I don’t think the concept is innate, but rational. I have come to the conclusion that morals are subjective and can’t be pre-supposed. I don’t however, think that humans act as animals in the sense that they are nothing more than reactors to stimuli. Humans react no doubt, but they also act and suppress instinct. Animals have a problem doing this without human intervention. I don’t agree with your position as stated above.
Yes you did.