From: phil@netcom.com (Phil Ronzone)
Newsgroups: ba.politics
Subject: Illogic man strikes again!
Date: 29 Jan 93 00:46:39 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: Generally in favor of, but mostly random.

In article <C1Ks4B.AAB@cup.hp.com> runyan@cup.hp.com (Mark Runyan) writes:
    >>How sad. Do you really believe this? It's the same concept
    >>that the USSR used in confisticating and then taxing the Jews
    >>that wanted to leave.
    >>
    >Yep, any one idea taken to extremes can rationalize
    >atrocities, especially yours.

Anytime an entity takes something from you at gunpoint, and then "gives"
you back something, it can't be called a "benefit". That's not an
extreme, that's not a rationalization, that's a fact.

Did YOU benefit from the State protecting you from North Vietnam from
1959 to 1972? By your reasoning you did -- the State taxed you and waged
war on North Vietnam. By your reasoning, any complaining you do is
ingratitude.

Change your mind now?


    >>I am not allowed to string my own power lines, nor to take
    >>back my property that the State stole and gave to the power
    >>companies so they could run power lines across my property.
    >>
    >By your reasoning, you stole resources from your parents,
    >teachers, and city workers to acquire your property, so
    >what's your problem?

Huh? What in hell are you babbling about?

I have stolen nothing. What twisted logic led to that proclamation?
Please attempt to justify your statement.


    >Yep, and you continue to use those resource, services, and
    >facilities that the government provides you and your family,
    >almost as if you had contracted for them.

You are reaching new extremes in intellectual dishonesty.

I have NO choice in these matters. That lack of choice is enforced
by gunpoint -- an immoral act.

By your twisted and sick logic, if the Mafia kidnapped me tommorow, and fed
me food while waiting for the ransom, you'd assert that the Mafia and I have
a "Social Contract" and they are providing me with "benefits" (the food).
Even better, unlike the State, the food is free!!!

    >The solution you are so fanatic about is only one of several
    >possible ways of having groups of people interact with each
    >other, and it has its problems as well.

Fanatic? I advocate a system of non-coercion for all intercourse among
people. By "several possible ways", I assume you mean my system, fascism,
socialism, communism. Freedom .vs. coercion.


    >P.S. to Phil: Discussion about solutions can be entertaining.
    >Talks regarding ideals can be equally entertaining. But when
    >you resort to the tactics you use, Phil, it isn't a
    >discussion, debate, or exchange of ideas. The sad part is,
    >you actually have something worthwhile to say. At least, it
    >is sad for me, for I can no longer listen to the way you say
    >it.

Hurts eh? People believing in shit hate to have their cherished myths
demolished -- especially when they believe in coercive methods.

One thing in common with most of you "opponents", whether you be leftists,
rightist, communist, socialist, fascists, or just plain old Politically
Correct-ists, you just CAN'T STAND thought that freedom means some group
or groups of people are going to get to do things YOU don't like.

How galling.


BTW -- your intellectual content in this post is, as usal, about zero.

-- 
There are actually people that STILL believe Love Canal was some kind of
environmental disaster. Weird, eh?

These opinions are MINE, and you can't have 'em! (But I'll rent 'em cheap ...)