Not 2 Serious finally answered, wrong.

RSS
Email

0 Kudo

Author	Comment
MorgaineA77	Not 2 Serious finally answered, wrong.	Lead	[-]
Posts: 63 (07/15/07 13:38:33) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Tags : None This is similar to your 'What is a Libertarian' post, but I want this question to not get lost. Do you think that a person has to right to take steriods if he or she wants and why or why not? "Theology focuses on our experience of being limited and finite and yet related to that which is limitless and infinite." Ann Belford Ulanov ***************** "Free will is the ability to do gladly that which you have to do." Carl Jung
Unregistered(d)	Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparently	#1	[-]
Posts: 0 (07/17/07 01:43:29) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	What kind of steriods?
aspong	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#2	[-]
Posts: 705 (07/17/07 02:23:08) Ho Ho, it is to laugh Moderator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	These debates are not about lifting or imposing individual freedom. One is anarchy, the other is total control. No, these debates are about where in between anarchy and total control you want to live. Ok, here's a question that perhaps gets the measure of this whole idea. At what point in an individual's freedom should a society step in and say no, and how should that be enforced? Arguably people should be allowed to do whatever the hell they want, as long as it harms no one else. But what constitutes harming someone else? For example, sometimes a person's bad behaviour can influence a younger mind. Not all parents are gifted with the ability to bring up well balanced children. Parents who can do this are arguably in the minority. That's not a right or wrong thing, it's just something that 'is'. Parents not so gifted in that area look for other aids to help them where they perhaps fall short. Community standards and laws are two such aids. Mentors are another. So, for some parents, community standards and laws prohibiting the use of illicit drugs, for example, help some parents to deal with rebellious kids. Not a watertight case by any means, it's just an example. There would be other reasons why a community feels a need to impose restrictions on personal freedoms. So, given the choice between some form of anarchy, total control or somewhere in between, each person will pin the tail on that donkey in a different place.
paxpatriot	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#3	[-]
Posts: 1598 (07/17/07 06:00:04) Banned User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I believe a person should be able to take whatever medication they choose to.
MorgaineA77	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#4	[-]
Posts: 63 (07/17/07 06:12:38) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	*Quote:* I believe a person should be able to take whatever medication they choose to. Even if that medication is cheating other people? "Theology focuses on our experience of being limited and finite and yet related to that which is limitless and infinite." Ann Belford Ulanov ***************** "Free will is the ability to do gladly that which you have to do." Carl Jung
paxpatriot	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#5	[-]
Posts: 1598 (07/17/07 06:18:48) Banned User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	If everyone can take it, how can it be cheating? However-if a person is part of a sport with rules against it, then that is a different matter-they should honor the contract they enter into to be a competitor. But not be told by the government what they can and cannot do/
MorgaineA77	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#6	[-]
Posts: 63 (07/17/07 06:22:15) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	*Quote:* If everyone can take it, how can it be cheating? Because taking it shrivels the tesicles and causes rages that hurt the take and others. So you are saying that just because everyone can take a performance enhancing substance that hurts them or those around them, it is ok to chest with it making it necessary for anyone who wants to compete to take it? *Quote:* However-if a person is part of a sport with rules against it, then that is a different matter-they should honor the contract they enter into to be a competitor. Oh, no, you have just gone against their right to do what they want to their body and to paint their house whatever color they want....you Nazi! "Theology focuses on our experience of being limited and finite and yet related to that which is limitless and infinite." Ann Belford Ulanov ***************** "Free will is the ability to do gladly that which you have to do." Carl Jung
not2serious	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#7	[-]
Posts: 1133 (07/17/07 06:22:58) Oracle Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Morgain-If you cannot stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Smoking is the same, eating too much is the same, taking steroids is the same. It is your body to abuse any way you choose. And, so are the risks yours and yours alone Aspong got it right. All we are dicussing is how much freedom a person can have. I work for the maximum, you work for the minimum. I think grown people have the right to make choices, even bad ones. You believe that the state is your parent, and has the right to put restrictions on you "for your own good". the key to this is you only get ONE life, and in 100 years we will all be dead. Why not live your life to the song "I did it my way", rather than the communist stand "he did it our way" Yes, take the steroids, let everyone take them. If you want to get into competative sports, DO IT. Make it legal, so there is no cheating. Everyont does it. Allan
paxpatriot	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#8	[-]
Posts: 1598 (07/17/07 06:24:22) Banned User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I am saying that a person, a free citizen, should be free to do with their body as they will. That they and they alone would be responsable for the outcome of their decisions. On the other hand, if an organization wants to set rules, no one is FORCING that citizen to join-they can either choose to obey by the rules, or decide not to participate. Free choice. You seem to be running a pre=planned line of argument, unrelated directly to my posts "Oh, no, you have just gone against their right to do what they want to their body and to paint their house whatever color they want....you Nazi!" You seem confused between involuntary and voluntary adherence to rules and codes of behavior. And you loose, anyway. Godwins rule. As to brown house-if you are part of a community, you abide by common agreements, Don't like te rules? Advocate for change. A house color is not your body.
MorgaineA77	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#9	[-]
Posts: 63 (07/17/07 06:32:38) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	*Quote:* Morgain-If you cannot stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. Smoking is the same, eating too much is the same, taking steroids is the same. No it isn't, but we finally come to the basic flaw in your philosophy and you won't face it. *Quote:* It is your body to abuse any way you choose. And, so are the risks yours and yours alone However, when athletes take it they are inpinging on the rights of other athletes. The talented and hardworking are penalized for having brains. *Quote:* Aspong got it right. All we are dicussing is how much freedom a person can have. I work for the maximum, you work for the minimum. I think grown people have the right to make choices, even bad ones. You believe that the state is your parent, and has the right to put restrictions on you "for your own good". What about the 'as long as it doesn't affect anyone else' part? *Quote:* the key to this is you only get ONE life, and in 100 years we will all be dead. Why not live your life to the song "I did it my way", rather than the communist stand "he did it our way" @#%$, but you guys really don't know much do you. Its either 'each man for himself, even if it hurts others' or you are a communist. You are too funny. *Quote:* Yes, take the steroids, let everyone take them. If you want to get into competative sports, DO IT. Make it legal, so there is no cheating. Everyont does it. Your problem is that athletes use their bodies and forcing them to take things that will shrivel their testicles and shorten life is not giving them a free choice. "Theology focuses on our experience of being limited and finite and yet related to that which is limitless and infinite." Ann Belford Ulanov ***************** "Free will is the ability to do gladly that which you have to do." Carl Jung
paxpatriot	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#10	[-]
Posts: 1598 (07/17/07 06:35:21) Banned User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	"Your problem is that athletes use their bodies and forcing them to take things that will shrivel their testicles and shorten life is not giving them a free choice. " No one is forcing anyone to do anything=rather, in the status quo you are forced to abjure things that ome might choose to use. Also, the horrid side effects you mention are not true of all performance enhancing drugs. At any rate, one certainly has choices. 1) Compete using them 2) compete not using them 3) Don't compete 4) Create a rule against using them, and require competitors to sign a contract that they wont. For four.
MorgaineA77	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#11	[-]
Posts: 63 (07/17/07 06:39:55) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	*Quote:* I am saying that a person, a free citizen, should be free to do with their body as they will. That they and they alone would be responsable for the outcome of their decisions. ou are saying that if some moron wants to take something that will shrivel his testicles and make him dangerous to others, that people who want to work hard should either shut up or be forced to take them also, just to compete. *Quote:* On the other hand, if an organization wants to set rules, no one is FORCING that citizen to join-they can either choose to obey by the rules, or decide not to participate. Free choice. @#%$, but this is one bankrupt philosophy. *Quote:* You seem to be running a pre=planned line of argument, unrelated directly to my posts You keep pretending that taking steroids is something that only affects the person taking them, regardless of the facts. *Quote:* "Oh, no, you have just gone against their right to do what they want to their body and to paint their house whatever color they want....you Nazi!" *************** You seem confused between involuntary and voluntary adherence to rules and codes of behavior. I was reminding N2S of his silly statement about housing covenants. Funny that he thinks buying a house with a covenant and being made obey that is being a Nazi, but taking dangerous medication that forced others to take it to compete, is just being a free spirit. Typical Liberatarian philosophy. "It only matters if I care about it, then I will make nothing into a big deal" Quote: As to brown house-if you are part of a community, you abide by common agreements, Don't like te rules? Advocate for change. Tell that to Not 2 Serious, the person to whom this thread was directed. Quote: A house color is not your body. And some things you do to your body affect other people. Pretending that it doesn't just shows the poverty of logic and even thought in Libertarianism. "Theology focuses on our experience of being limited and finite and yet related to that which is limitless and infinite." Ann Belford Ulanov *************** "Free will is the ability to do gladly that which you have to do." Carl Jung
paxpatriot	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#12	[-]
Posts: 1598 (07/17/07 06:43:42) Banned User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Morgaine, a person should have the right to make choices about his or her body. On a weekly basis, I poisen myself with distilled sprits. It is bad for me. It is potentially bad for those around me, where I to act irresponsably. It is legal. They tried to make it legal, and it did not work. A free citizen should be able to decide what they do with their body. For you to fail to understand that free choice on an idividual method is indeed a valid philosophy is troubling. No one would be forsce to take steroids. I pointed out four choices your poor theoretical athlete would have. Ignoring them is bankrupt philosophy. Indeed, having busted Godwins rule, you loose.
MorgaineA77	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#13	[-]
Posts: 63 (07/17/07 06:44:54) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	*Quote:* "Your problem is that athletes use their bodies and forcing them to take things that will shrivel their testicles and shorten life is not giving them a free choice. " ************************* No one is forcing anyone to do anything=rather, in the status quo you are forced to abjure things that ome might choose to use. You are pretending, with your 'let them eat cake' posture that taking steriods doesn't affect other people. Your very arguements show that it does affect other people. Thus you are wrong. Quote: Also, the horrid side effects you mention are not true of all performance enhancing drugs. At any rate, one certainly has choices. 1. Steroids are the topic. You are trying to move the goal post in order to hide your loss. That is a fallacy of logic that is used by people who are losing. Quote: 1) Compete using them 2) compete not using them 3) Don't compete 4) Create a rule against using them, and require competitors to sign a contract that they wont. For four. The first three only illustrate my point which is that when athletes use steriods they are doing something that affects other people. Thus the Libertarian goal of doing anything you want as long as it doesn't affect other people is not met here. You have tried to move to goal in order to met it, but even then you couldn't accomplish the goal. Your were 0 for 4. "Theology focuses on our experience of being limited and finite and yet related to that which is limitless and infinite." Ann Belford Ulanov *************** "Free will is the ability to do gladly that which you have to do." Carl Jung
paxpatriot	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#14	[-]
Posts: 1598 (07/17/07 06:48:03) Banned User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Um, the point is that no one would be FORCED to use steroids. While in the current system, athletes are FORCED to hide thir use, or avoid use that might help them, or are punished for use. Choice is denied. The fact that a person would need to make a choice is not an "effect" on others that justifies denying liberty to another. YEs, if everyone wears black shows and gray suits, than no one is forced to decide what to wear. The fact choices are available DOES have the effect of opening up choice to others. Course, they can still wear black shoues and gray suites if they want to. And again-your running an agnda that does not really address my points. I am not none, I have no duty to defend his advocacy Only my own. If free choice is to be denied there need to be a lot more copelling reasons than you offer. As noted, athletic organizations could ban steroid use and require members to agree or not compete.
MorgaineA77	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#15	[-]
Posts: 63 (07/17/07 06:51:15) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	*Quote:* Morgaine, a person should have the right to make choices about his or her body. I agree, as long as they don't affect others. (The Libertarian statnce) *Quote:* On a weekly basis, I poisen myself with distilled sprits. It is bad for me. It is potentially bad for those around me, where I to act irresponsably. Yup, go to it as long as you stay home and don't hurt anyone or don't drive. Of course, if you die young it will hurt your kids, but hey, they are your kids, do what you want to them. *Quote:* It is legal. They tried to make it legal, and it did not work. Yup *Quote:* A free citizen should be able to decide what they do with their body. For you to fail to understand that free choice on an idividual method is indeed a valid philosophy is troubling. That you are pretending that I don't understand that is troubling. You either can't read, are blinded by something or are being disengenuous. *Quote:* No one would be forsce to take steroids. I pointed out four choices your poor theoretical athlete would have. Ignoring them is bankrupt philosophy. Taking steriods in order to enhance performance is an act that affect every other athlete. It puts those who work hard and/or have talent at a disadvantage. You can't, with any honesty, say it doesn't affect others. *Quote:* Indeed, having busted Godwins rule, you loose. I will guarantee you that if someone uses their property, what they own, to build a dump next to your property, or burn dogs on the lawn everynight, or even do a bondfire in their back yard, you would suddenly see the light. Of course, if you are really a Libertarian, you will only see it for those things that you don't like, you will still be blind to what affects others. Libertarianism is bankrupt. "Theology focuses on our experience of being limited and finite and yet related to that which is limitless and infinite." Ann Belford Ulanov ***************** "Free will is the ability to do gladly that which you have to do." Carl Jung
paxpatriot	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#16	[-]
Posts: 1598 (07/17/07 06:56:55) Banned User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Um, Morgaine sweety. Your running stock arguments that do not address mine. One athlete using steroids no more forces others to than Bob in Acconting wearing a Blue suite to work instead of a gray one. Yes, they have more choices to make. Tough @#%$, that is life as an adult. Are you an adult, capable of making informed results, or are yo a child, needing to be told what to do? "Yup, go to it as long as you stay home and don't hurt anyone or don't drive. Of course, if you die young it will hurt your kids, but hey, they are your kids, do what you want to them. " Well, thank god your little fascist ain't running the show. Sometimes I go out, to places where I and like minded adult citizens mingle and consume poison. Now, if I was to do something dumb, and hurt someone-say, drive drunk... Would it be the drinking, or the drunken driving to blame? Both were choices. One is worthy of sanction, because of CLEAR harm to others. "I will guarantee you that if someone uses their property, what they own, to build a dump next to your property, or burn dogs on the lawn everynight, or even do a bondfire in their back yard, you would suddenly see the light. " Well, a strawman. I advocate rights to do no such things, ecept the bonfire so long as they invite me to the party. I am a strong bliever in communal duties and the power of democracy-restrained by common sense, the Constitution, and a decent respect for liberty. Shame the meaning of Liberty is so strange to you.
paxpatriot	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#17	[-]
Posts: 1598 (07/17/07 07:01:12) Banned User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	BTW, if you like start a "whats wrong with libertarianism" thread. I can show you exactly the problem, which is a lack of understanding of civic virtue and duty to other people.
MorgaineA77	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#18	[-]
Posts: 63 (07/17/07 07:04:10) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	*Quote:* Your running stock arguments that do not address mine. Your running stock arguements didn't address mine, however, I did address yours. *Quote:* One athlete using steroids no more forces others to than Bob in Acconting wearing a Blue suite to work instead of a gray one. If someone is using something dangerous to get advantage over others, who work, then it is unfair advantage. *Quote:* Yes, they have more choices to make. Tough @#%$, that is life as an adult. You are now saying that being stupid enough to take something that shrivels your testicles and causes you to go into rages, is being adult. *Quote:* Are you an adult, capable of making informed results, or are yo a child, needing to be told what to do? "I am an adult. I do not cheat in a way that makes others either quit or hurt themselves to keep up. Those may techincally be choices, but they are not options. *Quote:* Yup, go to it as long as you stay home and don't hurt anyone or don't drive. Of course, if you die young it will hurt your kids, but hey, they are your kids, do what you want to them. " *************************** Well, thank god your little fascist ain't running the show. Sometimes I go out, to places where I and like minded adult citizens mingle and consume poison . And if you drive, I only hope that you get caught before you hurt anyone but yourself. However, I am eternally amused when Libertarians call people who disagree with them fascists for the mere act of disagreeing. They don't even see the irony. Quote: Now, if I was to do something dumb, and hurt someone-say, drive drunk... Would it be the drinking or the drunken driving to blame? Both were choices. One is worthy of sanction, because of CLEAR harm to others. Ah, now you are going to be dishonest enough to try to make it look like I said you shouldn't drink. Oh, and 'drunk driving' isn't anything that can hurt anyone. Drunk driving doesn't hurt anyone, it is the people who drive drunk who hurt people and to a person they all think they are just using their rights as individuals and should be able to do what they want because it doesn't hurt anyone else. "Theology focuses on our experience of being limited and finite and yet related to that which is limitless and infinite." Ann Belford Ulanov *************** "Free will is the ability to do gladly that which you have to do." Carl Jung
MorgaineA77	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#19	[-]
Posts: 63 (07/17/07 07:05:11) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	*Quote:* BTW, if you like start a "whats wrong with libertarianism" thread. I can show you exactly the problem, which is a lack of understanding of civic virtue and duty to other people. And you don't think that playing fair is a civic virtue and a duty to other people? "Theology focuses on our experience of being limited and finite and yet related to that which is limitless and infinite." Ann Belford Ulanov ***************** "Free will is the ability to do gladly that which you have to do." Carl Jung
paxpatriot	Re: Question Not 2 Serious doesn't want to answer, apparentl	#20	[-]
Posts: 1598 (07/17/07 07:14:03) Banned User Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	"You are now saying that being stupid enough to take something that shrivels your testicles and causes you to go into rages, is being adult. " Christ that is a weak strawman. Are you that stupid? I am saying that an adult citizen should have the right to make decisions about their own body, even stupid decisions, and that being entrusted with such decisions is the mark of an adult rather than a child. A child cannot makebinding decisions. They cannot be held to contracts, or held respronsable in most cases for their decisions. Grow up and stop the strawmen ""I am an adult. I do not cheat in a way that makes others either quit or hurt themselves to keep up. Those may techincally be choices, but they are not options. " No, rather you choose to set rules that deny others the choice to seek things they may like. Now, if this was a voluntary agreement, then no worries. But give it the force of law, and it is tyranny. "And if you drive, I only hope that you get caught before you hurt anyone but yourself. However, I am eternally amused when Libertarians call people who disagree with them fascists for the mere act of disagreeing. They don't even see the irony." No, you are a fascist for your earlier claim that drinking anywhere except home is not acceptable. "Ah, now you are going to be dishonest enough to try to make it look like I said you shouldn't drink. " Here you claim I am lying, Could you please cut and paster where I said you said I should not drink? Either this is another strawmen (any straw left there, Morgaine?) or else you have utterly misunderstood wht I am saying. "Oh, and 'drunk driving' isn't anything that can hurt anyone. Drunk driving doesn't hurt anyone, it is the people who drive drunk who hurt people and to a person they all think they are just using their rights as individuals and should be able to do what they want because it doesn't hurt anyone else." That was complete and utter gibberish. Choosing to drivee drunk is to choose to have a high chance of injuring someone through your incapacity. We are responable for the predictable outcomes of our actions. So that choice is immoral, and rightly regulated. In a way that taking steroid, with their side effects and all, is not. Or has Lance Armstrong been going into rages?

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

Not 2 Serious finally answered, wrong.

Not 2 Serious finally answered, wrong.

Quick Reply