The Coronavirus thread

Quote: Mission146

You'd think the Evangelicals on the right would have no problem accepting tyranny, considering they take it from a (probably) make believe character.

"My imaginary friend could beat up your imaginary friend."

That sums up Christianity vs. Islam.

Quote: Mission146

I would say that we have laws that prohibit one person from murdering another for the common good, wouldn't you agree?

Political power has always been more important than lives to both major parties, unless a person hasn't been born yet, which the right really seems to care a lot about, for whatever reason.

No, we have laws against murder because murder harms someone, the deceased.

Quote: AZDuffman

"For the common good" is generally left-win weasel words. Used to convince people to accept losses to their freedoms and be happy about it.

Conservatives did try to work in harmony in 2020. Democrats instead decided to use the virus for political gain, figuring every death was more votes. Political power has always been more important than lives to the Democrat Party.

Save that claptrap for your sheeple.

Quote: AZDuffman

No, we have laws against murder because murder harms someone, the deceased.

So...having laws that you may not wantonly harm people is not for the common good? I'm pretty sure we enact laws that protect people from being wantonly harmed, in any physical way that is done out of malice, for the common good.

Quote: Mission146

So...having laws that you may not wantonly harm people is not for the common good? I'm pretty sure we enact laws that protect people from being wantonly harmed, in any physical way that is done out of malice, for the common good.

No, we do it to protect people. Easy to say why we have a law against beating people up. To protect someone from being beat up. But when a good reason cannot be given the tyrannical government will say it is "for the common good."

Watch "Atlas Shrugged" parts I and II for many examples.

Quote: AZDuffman

No, we do it to protect people. Easy to say why we have a law against beating people up. To protect someone from being beat up. But when a good reason cannot be given the tyrannical government will say it is "for the common good."

Watch "Atlas Shrugged" parts I and II for many examples.

What!? Is it not sufficient for you to either believe a law is a positive law or that a law is a negative law? You're really arguing right now that we have laws to protect people, but yet, the laws that we have to protect people are not for the common good.

Is protecting citizens from violence not for the common good? If not, then does that mean that laws to protect people are bad?

Quote: Mission146

What!? Is it not sufficient for you to either believe a law is a positive law or that a law is a negative law? You're really arguing right now that we have laws to protect people, but yet, the laws that we have to protect people are not for the common good.

Is protecting citizens from violence not for the common good? If not, then does that mean that laws to protect people are bad?

My point is when a law is justified as "for the common good" you can be sure it is a law that saps your freedom but has so little defense that "for the common good" is the only reason its supporters can give.

Again, watch the movies, especially part II as it shows this the best.

AZD has gone down the rabbit hole on this one,

Dude, getting vaccinated does more than serving "the common good;" as with your example of an accepatable law, laws against murder, getting vaccinated also protects people.

Duh.

Quote: missedhervee

AZD has gone down the rabbit hole on this one,

Dude, getting vaccinated does more than serving "the common good;" as with your example of an accepatable law, laws against murder, getting vaccinated also protects people.

Duh.

I wasn't even trying to ask a trapping question. My entire point was that, for virtually every law that gets passed that impacts the public, someone thought that law was for the common good.

Quote: Mission146

I wasn't even trying to ask a trapping question. My entire point was that, for virtually every law that gets passed that impacts the public, someone thought that law was for the common good.

You are missing the point. Banning murder will be for the common good but nobody has to say "we are doing it for the common good" as it just makes sense. When an unpopular law is passed and the justification is "it is for the common good" you have a freedom sapping law who's purpose is more for taking power than actually for the common good.