U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-17-2009, 09:54 AM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,538,289 times
Reputation: 35864

Advertisements

Unless you are also Jetgraphics, this is not about your post. His post was patently absurd in every paragraph, particularly the two paragraphs that directly contradicted each other. It smacked of trollism, and nearly all his posts on all forums motivate from one single-minded premise, and reduce every argument to his extreme fringe political stance. I welcome his defense of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-17-2009, 10:42 AM
 
Location: Pensacola, Fl
656 posts, read 951,378 times
Reputation: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
Unless you are also Jetgraphics, this is not about your post.
Point? I'm defending the absurdity and rudeness you launched at his post. That's a defense mechanism (and cop-out) you are using when met with someone who won't back down or let you go off on a tangent without being called on it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
His post was patently absurd in every paragraph, particularly the two paragraphs that directly contradicted each other.
I've read, re-read, and re-read his post again. It's not absurd and it's not contradictory at all. Maybe you need to go back and re-read his post and think about what he is saying.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
It smacked of trollism, and nearly all his posts on all forums motivate from one single-minded premise, and reduce every argument to his extreme fringe political stance. I welcome his defense of it.
If anything, it is you with the trollish behavior. This isn't the first thread that I've read where you have posted and come totally off the wall with post (that are most likely off topic or are a tangent to the OP) toward other posters for no apparent reason other than trying to get a rise out of people. You really should take some of your own advice.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2009, 11:32 AM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,538,289 times
Reputation: 35864
ME on a tangent? Jetgraphics is the one who went off on this absurdly sweeping and exclusionary absolutist generalization


All law is the protection of property rights, all else is policy and policy requires consent.

Instead of trying to defend your own equally absurd theology that Happiness and Property are perfect synonyms of each other, as endowed by the Creator, and nothing can be one without the other.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2009, 11:51 AM
 
Location: Pensacola, Fl
656 posts, read 951,378 times
Reputation: 373
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
ME on a tangent? Jetgraphics is the one who went off on this absurdly sweeping and exclusionary absolutist generalization.
As if you don't? Again, jtur, try taking your own advice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
Instead of trying to defend your own equally absurd theology that Happiness and Property are perfect synonyms of each other, as endowed by the Creator, and nothing can be one without the other.
Dude, did you even read the part in my post where I said I was not a theist. In order to have some sort of theology you have to be some sort of theist (or deist); put two and two together my friend. Matter of fact, I doubt if you actually read (not scanned) any of my post as you seem to think that I'm trying to make happiness and property out to be synonyms. Maybe you should step away for a while to cool your emotions off. Your not making much of any sense right now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2009, 12:22 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,538,289 times
Reputation: 35864
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
private property ownership (euphemistically called "pursuit of happiness") are endowed by our Creator..
I rest my case.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2009, 01:45 PM
 
3,566 posts, read 4,490,175 times
Reputation: 1846
In John Locke's Second Treatise of Civil Government in Chapter 9:

Quote:
This makes him willing to quit a condition, which,
however free, is full of fears and continual dangers: and it is not without
reason, that he seeks out, and is willing to join in society with others,
who are already united, or have a mind to unite, for the mutual preservation of their lives, liberties and estates, which I call by the general name, property.

In John Locke's Second Treatise of Civil Government in Chapter 15:

Quote:
(By property I must be understood here, as in other places, to mean that property which men have in their persons as well as goods.)
He is speaking of the right to rights. Not just, property.


http://www.constitution.org/jl/2ndtreat.htm
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2009, 02:11 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,538,289 times
Reputation: 35864
Did Locke ever use Jetgraphics' words: private property ownership (euphemistically called "pursuit of happiness") to comprise his general "property" and equate it with happiness?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2009, 02:26 PM
 
3,566 posts, read 4,490,175 times
Reputation: 1846
Nope. In fact, this concept predates Locke, who just wrote it much more clearly then others. The misinterpretation is a recent invention.

Locke mentions this two other times.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2009, 03:41 PM
 
3,566 posts, read 4,490,175 times
Reputation: 1846
James Madison also speaks of both:

Quote:
This term in its particular application means "that dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in exclusion of every other individual."
In its larger meaning, it embraces every thing to which a man may attach a value and have a right; and which leaves to every one else the like advantage.
In the former sense, a manís land, or merchandize, or money is called his property.
In the latter sense, a man has property in his opinions and the free communication of them.
The entire document can be found here:

Property by James Madison
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-17-2009, 04:03 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,668 posts, read 71,538,289 times
Reputation: 35864
I doubt if there has ever been a court ruling in the United States in which "property" has been construed to mean anything anywhere near that broad. Call your car insurance agent and ask him what "personal property" coverage includes.

Libertarians can call it whatever they want---I cannot sue for "property damage" if you stand between me and a rainbow and obstruct my view of it, which is my "pursuit of happiness".

In United States law, fully based on the Constitution, "Property" has never been held to mean that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top