Trump

Anything not relating to the X-Universe games (general tech talk, other games...) belongs here. Please read the rules before posting.

Moderator: Moderators for English X Forum

User avatar
Morkonan
Posts: 2462
Joined: Sun, 25. Sep 11, 04:33
x3tc

Post by Morkonan » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 17:56

Observe wrote:At what point does the individual liberty of one person, become an infringement on the individual liberty of others?
I've said this so often that I can't remember if I created it or I remembered it as being quoted from someone else...

"Majority rule with tyranny towards none" - that's what is supposed to exist in the U.S.
For example: One person believes God has told them that they must shout their gospel on the street corner. A person walking nearby, may find this gospel objectionable, but they can't do anything about it, because to do so would deprive the preacher of his/her liberty.
But, they may not be able to just start shouting their "gospel" or "proselytizing" in the middle of a crowded sidewalk. They may need to get a permit, first. And that's how we've put a control in place for this sort of thing.
Another: One person thinks they should be able to ride their loud, smelly dirt bike over remote hiking trails. Another person has worked hard all year, so they can take a month off work to walk this trail and to enjoy the greatness and wonder of nature.
There is certainly public land that has restrictions on vehicles and use, accommodating either desire. BUT, one doesn't have the right to go to a bike trail, set aside for that purpose, and to demand bikers stop biking.
Individual liberty is fine, as long as it doesn't harm others. The trouble we run into, is in defining harm. In neither example, was anyone physically harmed. However, there was emotional harm.
We have defined what "can not be done." That's the Bill of Rights. But, it only applies to public and government action/lands. And, in some cases, restrictions have been agreed upon. For instance, you can't demand to go into an ICBM missile bunker to do your knitting... You also can't park in the middle of the street or on the sidewalk. And, where it comes down to individuals, neither the government nor anyone else can take away someone's Rights, though an individual may agree to voluntarily curtail those rights in certain situations. (Like not shouting "Movie" in a crowded firehouse.) But, no person can separate themselves from their rights, no matter what.
A big part of the social debate occurring in present times, involves deciding what is the acceptable threshold of emotional pain, one person can inflict upon another, in the name of personal liberty?
You can not force another person to do something they do not want to do without significant legal ramifications. Only the government can do that. :) However, people do not have the right to not be offended by the legal actions of others as long as they are able to choose to avoid being exposed to those actions.

If you're scrolling through the TV channels and see some nudity, you're empowered to change the channel. Being offended by an accidental bit of full-frontal might have been the result, but you weren't forced to watch it.

User avatar
Hank001
Posts: 303
Joined: Wed, 22. Feb 06, 00:50
x3ap

Post by Hank001 » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 18:12

Guess Trump just can't stop lying about anything that disagrees with his proir lies. Wonder how he keeps his lies straight sometimes but spouting that the total deaths in the Puerto Rican hurricane are lies cooked up by the Democrats might be pushing things too far. (Unless he's figuring he'd better jump on this quick before his base starts believing the truth. Can't have that happening.)
Donald J. Trump
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
.....This was done by the Democrats in order to make me look as bad as possible when I was successfully raising Billions of Dollars to help rebuild Puerto Rico. If a person died for any reason, like old age, just add them onto the list. Bad politics. I love Puerto Rico!
https://www.npr.org/2018/09/13/64737791 ... -democrats

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/09/13/poli ... index.html
The answer to life, the universe and everything:
MIND THE GAP

RegisterMe
Posts: 1220
Joined: Sun, 14. Oct 07, 17:47
x4

Post by RegisterMe » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 19:07

Even if you don't like the Young Turks this piece about Trump's response to 9/11, and this year's anniversary, is worth watching.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Qr0wBwN4PU
Gavrushka wrote:The problem with 'freedom of speech' is it makes wackos think they have something of value to say.

*WE WANT THE amtct BACK*
Rapier's search

User avatar
clakclak
Posts: 114
Joined: Sun, 13. Jul 08, 19:29
x3

Post by clakclak » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 19:25

RegisterMe wrote:Even if you don't like the Young Turks[...]
Lets be honest. Is there anyone who does? :lol:
Laugh and the world laughs with you,
Weep, and you weep alone;
The good old earth must borrow its mirth,
But has trouble enough of its own.

- Ella Wheeler Wilcox

User avatar
fiksal
Posts: 3468
Joined: Tue, 2. May 06, 17:05
x3

Post by fiksal » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 19:25

Observe wrote:At what point does the individual liberty of one person, become an infringement on the individual liberty of others?
When the other person dictates what one can or can not do.
That's as far as people go.

As far as government goes, that is allowed to do even less.

Observe wrote: For example: One person believes God has told them that they must shout their gospel on the street corner. A person walking nearby, may find this gospel objectionable, but they can't do anything about it, because to do so would deprive the preacher of his/her liberty.
Other than disturbing the peace, I see no issues.


Observe wrote: Another: One person thinks they should be able to ride their loud, smelly dirt bike over remote hiking trails. Another person has worked hard all year, so they can take a month off work to walk this trail and to enjoy the greatness and wonder of nature.
Unless park prohibits it, and many do, again, no issues.
Observe wrote: Individual liberty is fine, as long as it doesn't harm others. The trouble we run into, is in defining harm. In neither example, was anyone physically harmed. However, there was emotional harm.

A big part of the social debate occurring in present times, involves deciding what is the acceptable threshold of emotional pain, one person can inflict upon another, in the name of personal liberty?
Fair, and we can talk about defining where the emotional harm becomes significant. But we are as a society generally arent there yet and are still dealing with more than just emotional issues.

We have countries that disallow more basic things, like freedom to be in a union with another human. From that we disallow many other economic opportunities, protections under law and in courts, pursuit of family.

In US there are backwards places that prevent children from getting access to scientific knowledge, that force children to pray religion that is not theirs.

To be clear though, I mean public/government/city.

brucewarren
Posts: 1760
Joined: Wed, 26. Mar 08, 15:15
x3tc

Post by brucewarren » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 19:39

@fiksal another example for you.

Person A and person B live in a block of flats, or what Americans call apartments.

Between the flats is something that is officially called a wall but in practical terms might as well be a thin piece of paper.

It's two in the morning. Person A wishes to hold a loud party. Person B wishes to get a nights sleep. Given the lack of sound insulation the two activities cannot both take place at the same time.

Should the council/government intervene and prevent A from holding his party?

In the UK there are laws about how much noise you can make late at night. Is this an infringement of A's rights or is it merely common sense?

User avatar
fiksal
Posts: 3468
Joined: Tue, 2. May 06, 17:05
x3

Post by fiksal » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 19:48

brucewarren wrote:@fiksal another example for you.

Person A and person B live in a block of flats, or what Americans call apartments.

Between the flats is something that is officially called a wall but in practical terms might as well be a thin piece of paper.

It's two in the morning. Person A wishes to hold a loud party. Person B wishes to get a nights sleep. Given the lack of sound insulation the two activities cannot both take place at the same time.

Should the council/government intervene and prevent A from holding his party?

In the UK there are laws about how much noise you can make late at night. Is this an infringement of A's rights or is it merely common sense?
I dont think it's infringing the rights in this case, since person B is not prevented from having a party.

There are laws in US too about the noise, as well as neighborhood ordinances.

User avatar
Hank001
Posts: 303
Joined: Wed, 22. Feb 06, 00:50
x3ap

Post by Hank001 » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 20:20

The Kavenaugh hearings delayed:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/ ... 20%251%24s

Got some time on you're hands?

https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/policy ... en-answers

And way...WAY out there in the fringes this happened:

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/busi ... 20%251%24s

A tip of the tinfoil hat to Reddit I guess...
The answer to life, the universe and everything:
MIND THE GAP

User avatar
felter
Posts: 305
Joined: Sat, 9. Nov 02, 19:13
xr

Post by felter » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 20:42

Qanon devotees falsely believe that President Donald Trump is secretly waging a war with special counsel Robert Mueller to take down a global pedophile ring led by Hollywood celebrities and the Democratic Party, most notably Hillary Clinton.
I heard Trump has problems taking down his own pants, let alone try to take down some mystical fantasy paedophile (spelt right) ring. :D
I'm not saying he is a Russian asset, I'm saying he sat on his asset when he was supposed to be confronting Putin.
He will not be re-elected. Without a wall, he will only be remembered as a small cartoon figure who briefly inflamed and amused the rabble.

User avatar
fiksal
Posts: 3468
Joined: Tue, 2. May 06, 17:05
x3

Post by fiksal » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 20:53

71000 of crazy

User avatar
Hank001
Posts: 303
Joined: Wed, 22. Feb 06, 00:50
x3ap

Post by Hank001 » Thu, 13. Sep 18, 21:11

@ felter
Nope. Us "merikans" actually spell it like a foot fetish.
Sounds crazy but the American Psychiatric Association started it and nobody's tried to correct it:
pe·do·phile /ˈpedəˌfīl, ˌpēdə-/ (Brit. pae·do·phile)
▸ noun
a person who is sexually attracted to children.
– DERIVATIVES
pe·do·phil·i·a /ˌpedəˈfilēə, ˌpēdə-/ noun
pe·do·phil·i·ac /-ˈfilēˌak/ adjective & noun.
– ORIGIN from Greek pais ‘child.’
Your listed spelling is "archaic". :roll:

Anyway there's a minority of GOP (Republican) lawmakers that are still at least trying to make things work:

https://youtu.be/DyPq39Qsufg

Personally I think Ben's chances of even getting the bill read are nill minus.

Edit! Just broke:

https://youtu.be/trTLC-4JhQc

Kavenaugh's got trouble?
The answer to life, the universe and everything:
MIND THE GAP

Bishop149
Posts: 1771
Joined: Fri, 9. Apr 04, 21:19
x3

Post by Bishop149 » Fri, 14. Sep 18, 01:37

Ok, its a strongly contested category but I'm pretty sure this takes the prize for "Worst thing he's ever tweeted"

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 7703026689
"Shoot for the Moon. If you miss, you'll end up co-orbiting the Sun alongside Earth, living out your days alone in the void within sight of the lush, welcoming home you left behind." - XKCD

User avatar
Hank001
Posts: 303
Joined: Wed, 22. Feb 06, 00:50
x3ap

Post by Hank001 » Fri, 14. Sep 18, 01:50

Bishop149:
Ok, its a strongly contested category but I'm pretty sure this takes the prize for "Worst thing he's ever tweeted"
Posted this up near the top of this page and he's REALLY stepped in it here and the harder he barks this (insert poop emoji) in hopes it keeps his base believing it the more everyone else not wearing tinfoil hats roll their eye at him. :roll: :rant: (see?)
The answer to life, the universe and everything:
MIND THE GAP

Skism
Posts: 382
Joined: Mon, 22. Mar 10, 22:36
x3tc

Post by Skism » Fri, 14. Sep 18, 03:17

Hank001 wrote:Guess Trump just can't stop lying about anything that disagrees with his proir lies. Wonder how he keeps his lies straight sometimes but spouting that the total deaths in the Puerto Rican hurricane are lies cooked up by the Democrats might be pushing things too far. (Unless he's figuring he'd better jump on this quick before his base starts believing the truth. Can't have that happening.)
Donald J. Trump
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
.....This was done by the Democrats in order to make me look as bad as possible when I was successfully raising Billions of Dollars to help rebuild Puerto Rico. If a person died for any reason, like old age, just add them onto the list. Bad politics. I love Puerto Rico!
https://www.npr.org/2018/09/13/64737791 ... -democrats

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/09/13/poli ... index.html
And here is my response

Fact Check: Trump is Right About Puerto Rico, Critics Manipulating Hurricane Maria Death ‘Estimates’

Again they are doing this in a cheap way to attack Trump but then thats the standard motto for leftists these days ;) :roll: :twisted:
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest."

-Thomas Paine-

User avatar
Masterbagger
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue, 14. Oct 14, 00:49
x4

Post by Masterbagger » Fri, 14. Sep 18, 03:49

Observe wrote:
A big part of the social debate occurring in present times, involves deciding what is the acceptable threshold of emotional pain, one person can inflict upon another, in the name of personal liberty?
There is no freedom from having your feelings hurt. In all but the most sick and extraordinary of instances the cure for having your jimmies rustled is to just toughen up and deal with it. The last thing we need to do is give the perpetually offended more weapons to use to make our lives miserable accommodating them.
Who made that man a gunner?

Post Reply

Return to “Off Topic English”