Your Rights are Under Fire, Folks

PROPERTY RIGHTS UNDER FIRE-EMINENT DOMAIN

http://emdo.blogspot.com/2006/07/stop-eminent-domain-eviction-at-halper.html

http://www.castlecoalition.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain

http://www.freestarmedia.com/halper.html

And how is this not socialism we americans supposedly hate so much? Very sad that such thing is allowed to happen.

>>2
Haha yeah, if we the people have property, and the government/state expropriates/confiscates it for "the public good," what the hell is that?

>>3
Socialism\communism.

>>3
Fascism/republicanism.

>>5
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/dict.asp?Word=republicanism

How is that republican?

http://www.amendmente.com/

>>4 The crusade on drugs has caused a lot of forfeiture of individual property. Conservatives care for stupid parents, homophobes, christians, corporations and gun-owners. That's how far they're individualism goes.

>>8 Their, not they're.

>>8
Not all conservatives. 

>>10 No, of course not. I should have said "a mahority of" for clarity.

>>6
Republicant (n.) evil reptile

>>12 No sane human consciously engage in actions he/she believe are evil. All we can do is look to what is generally destructive/constructive in the long, long run. I think 'evil' is the most unnecessary word in the world.

>>13
"No sane human consciously engage in actions he/she believe are evil."
Wow, you're naive. I'm so suprised!

>>14 The road to hell is:
a) chair b) perpendicular with f o g when x>3 c) paved with good intentions
3 marks possible, no motivation required

Believe it or not, there are actually those within the republican party who favor legalization of drugs.  (They are basically libertarians who run on that ticket). 

This is why all these democrats who vote "strait democrat" are really fucking stupid.  Not only are they voting against many of the good guys, they are voting for the corrupt as shit democrats, further detriments to liberty, and most particularly, to the right of self defense and property. 

>>16 They also care about secularism, protection of gay rights and the furthering of the feminist agenda. Not to mention that US labor laws are draconian. So you buy the package that makes you the least sick inside. And I thin guns are overrated anyway.

>>17
Gay rights are nice, since I'm gay, but let's not go overboard ie. no "hate speech" laws or shit like that. Secularism is always nice too, but why you want to further feminist agenda? Shouldn't we make women and men equal instead of supporting female chauvinism?

I always vote, but I never agree with a party 100%. When I choose to vote I take it apon myself to tell the MP in person why I voted for him, but what we disagree apon. A short speech and a letter I hand to him in person brimming with rational irrefutable arguments.

Is this weird?

>>19 If you speak the truth, you are a role model for us all.

>>18
Yeah, people have right to hate gays or women, but in the eyes of LAW everyone should be equal no matter what. That's where we might still need some change although it's pretty good now. We have laws against slander and assault which is good thing. If someone physically or  psychologically harrasses you, you can sue his ass and in case of severe physical harrasment even put bullet in his head depending on self defense laws. Hating women or gays isn't good thing, but it falls under freedom of speech and expression as long as you don't act it out beyond that. Banning speech and opnions is always bad thing.

>>21 If people don't call bullshit on unfounded extremism such as "kids of gay couples run 11 times the chance to get abused", then we get extreme policies to smote these people. I'd gladly burn every single church in america to the ground if it would decrease anti-gay sentiments (not assuming that it would, but that's the depth of my loyalty)

>>22
I'd gladly do that too, but I don't let my emotions take me over. I'm a supporter of freedom of speech and expression. That includes also bad speech. I would be just sad hypocrite if I didn't defend my ideals as whole. I don't see any reason why we would need to "ban" extremism. We have constitution. Let's make it clear that gays have equal rights and anti-gay laws are unconstitutional. Gay hating will quietly die that way. Let them ramble about their agenda, but remove their power. It's worst thing you can do to your enemy.

Plenty of reason to never vote for a left-winger, liberal, or statist, ever. 

>>22
"I'd gladly burn every single church in america to the ground if it would decrease anti-gay sentiments"
Would you burn down the mosques and synagogues aswell or do you have something against christians solely?

Point in case, I wouldn't burn down all of the homes of liberals to decrease anti-christian sentiment.


>>23
Likewise Xel doesn't have the power to burn down churches.

>>25 Points all over. I shouldn't have posted that shit at all. I just don't feel anything except contempt towards any ideology that feel the need to operate on a metaphysical level.

>>8
Points all over, but the facts are, the dems are definitely not better from an individualists' perspective.

Also, not all conservatives are like what you describe.  Some are more or less libertarian. 

Moral of the story is, I guess, vote intelligently? Check voting records, write your representatives telling why or why you didn't vote for them. 

For example, since some republicans support gun control, it would be stupid to vote strait republican, since some of your votes would be, essentially, for gun control. 

Similarly, some democrats oppose gun control, so voting strait ticket republican would be casting votes against that minority. 

Ideally, the voter would be intelligent, know the stand of every candidate, not vote strait party tickets, and cast his votes on an individual basis.  (I plan to).

>>27
Exactly.  For example, some republicans are pro-choice and pro-gay rights.  Thus, to vote blanketly democrat/liberal would be to vote against that minority of libertarian leaning republicans (aka republitarians). 

>>27
Conservative means traditionalist. Typical conservatives are hothead Christians, but you should note that real American tradition favors liberal(real liberal, not this modern abomination) values. There are conservatives who follow that tradition. Ironically Libertarians who are most civil rights and freedom oriented party could be seen as conservatives.

>>29
Exactly.  To some people, conservative means smaller government. 

>>29
But for 'conserving' which traditions? An AMERICAN conservative, would be 'conservative' in that he is for 'conserving' such american traditions as freedom, the bill of rights, smaller government, liberty, etc. 

>>31
Yeah, that's technically true, but you should note that there are lots of conservatives in America who dig out traditions from their ass and think Christian morals are true American values. Sadly they seem to be majority now and true American conservatives are small minority.

http://www.lp.org/fp/article_373.shtml

Very worthy of noting, the libertarian party recently fought a battle over this sort of thing in Ohio.