 Author
|
Topic: Should children get the freedom of religion? (Read 17578 times)
|
|
John Edward Mercier
|
Not really. It would simply be the choice of each worker to be an independent contractor... the real problem being the inherent inefficency in some pursuits.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
WendellBerry
|
And the problem I have with that is the coercion necessary to force businesses to stay below a certain size.
And it is limited liability privilege that allows business to get too big... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
John Edward Mercier
|
I don't believe so... each business risks its full assets even under the limited liability model.
With many of those businesses being not much larger than mom-n-pop operations.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
BagOfEyebrows
|
BOE, John Adams didn't believe in self-governance, any more than you do. He believed people should obey collective desires... especially when those collective desires matched his own. The Bar Association wasn't necessary for the legal field.
Uncle Walt, Most gov't schools that choose to ban religious displays do so because they are subject to equal protection. And if the school is sponsoring/hosting the voluntary event... its usually subject to a lot of restrictions.
But I think that much of that is dependent on the individual State constitutions... and municipal regulation.
Mr. Mercier - John Adams is not the man who created the concept of 'state' - New Hampshire was the first state, and you might want to take a gander at article 3 in THAT state constitution and NOTE that it is NOT in the Massachusetts one. John Adams did NOT support (initially) the idea that people should all live under the authority of the consensus - he had established a setup (in Massachusetts) by which the people, as lawful/moral and self-governing individuals, with individual rights, were supreme to their town - and a town supreme to its county - and a county supreme to all other governing bodies - even the courts (again, not a government institution!) Please don't accuse me of being anti-self-governing simply because you disagree with some actions of John Adams (as do I, you should know), or because you have a misunderstanding about what the Constitution of Massachusetts tried to accomplish towards the goal of liberty and freedom - |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
BagOfEyebrows
|
I hold NO SHOCK anymore that the Catholic church has a Pope pushing for global socialism The Pope's have repeatedly condemned "global socialism" and endorsed "distributism". Not this one: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/encyclicals/documents/hf_ben-xvi_enc_20090629_caritas-in-veritate_en.html“In the search for solutions to the current economic crisis, development aid for poor countries must be considered a valid means of creating wealth for all." He constantly tells governments they need to assist each other; but how is it that governments obtain the funding to help out other nations? TAXATION. So instead of asking a nation's people to be charitable, he requests governments do it! When he KNOWS that to remove love and trust FROM charity is to render charity impossible towards the goal of good will - Catholicism is supposed to begin with God and his laws; charity and good will can not be achieved by breaking any of the 10 Commandments. THOSE are the principles - it ALL begins there. And it begins there even in non-religious doctrines that proclaim the way to liberty and freedom - respect of individual rights to life and property means that you will not harm another person in their life or property, by committing the acts of fraud, theft, breaking contracts, and/or killing. Those acts are an infringement on individual rights - And what is this call for wealth for all, in the first place, when the Pope oughta know that it is the humble man, the meak among us, the poorest of the poor, whom are most likely to build a relationship with their creator and the laws and upon THAT foundation lift themselves up and out of poverty, built upon THE SAME PREMISE of individual responsibility and lawfulness/morality (re: not infringing on other people's rights!) towards the bettering of one's life station, found in even the most atheist of liberty doctrines? Read the transcript from his UN speech back in 2008, and you tell me... if this is supposedly distributism, where's the principle of subsidiarity in any of this? http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/04/18/us/nationalspecial2/20080418_POPE_SPEECH_FEATURE.html#He reminds me of Obama - saying OPPOSITE things, simultaneously - confusing the 'masses' - which is why over 50% of Catholics voted for Obama, mind you. Sheer confusion. Trusting the lies. Trusting 'hope' and 'change' - words from a liar's mouth. (Yes, I am calling Obama a liar. I would tell him that to his face, too, although I doubt, highly, I'll ever meet the man. But if I did, I'd confront him, verbally, on what he did during his campaign - he LIED! And that is WRONG to do to people! He has betrayed each and every person who voted for him! He betrayed THE WORLD, really.) Any speech I've read from this particular Pope has an awful case of doublespeak - and much as I applaud the man for some decent quotes that almost sound liberty and freedom oriented, because in the same batch of breaths he's then calling out for governments to do anti-liberty and anti-freedom things... well... I think even George Bush had some great liberty-sounding one-liners, especially during his campaigns, but I'm not exactly going to give a standing ovation to his years in office. Hey, by the way, good to see you in here. Been a while since we argued. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
BagOfEyebrows
|
And the problem I have with that is the coercion necessary to force businesses to stay below a certain size.
ditto. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
BagOfEyebrows
|
And the problem I have with that is the coercion necessary to force businesses to stay below a certain size.
And it is limited liability privilege that allows business to get too big... WendellBerry - the entire philosophy of distributism begins with an act of covet - and that's supposed to be a huge no-no to Catholics (supposedly...) Maybe the 10 Commandments being taken out of Catholic schools as part of the teachings is the reason those laws are no longer abided by, even by those in leadership positions proclaiming to be in agreeance to them. The leaders of the Catholic church will rally around the commandment of Thou Shalt Not Kill when trying to outlaw abortion - but what about Thou Shalt Not Covet, eh? They need to either follow their God's laws in the formation of a political or economic philosophy, or not attempt political or economic philosophy at all if they can't be holy about it. And if they do come up with a great, moral, political and/or economic philosophy, they should lead by example with it - not force it onto others, nor attempt to get all world governments or the UN to force it upon all for them. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
BagOfEyebrows
|
And I keep meeting more and more Catholics who are outraged at their leadership; I hope they take their religion BACK and go back to the basic foundations of it - I may not agree with all Catholic doctrine, but as long as a Catholic is follower of the 10 Commandments, and as long as they understand free will, and as long as they are a goodwill towards mankind via leading by example... that's the kind of Catholics I hope continue to join the FSP and assist on this quest towards liberty.
Because right there IS the foundation of liberty - and freedom - and peace. Same can be found in all sects of Christianity - and even agnosticism and atheism, really.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
B.D. Ross
|
And the problem I have with that is the coercion necessary to force businesses to stay below a certain size.
And it is limited liability privilege that allows business to get too big... Absurd. Not just because you've incorporated some arbitrary judgment of what "too big" means. The "limited liability privilege" is held by the shareholders. It does not directly benefit the limited liability entity. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
freestatelaw.com - Get plugged in with what you need to know about New Hampshire law and legislative efforts.
|
|
|
|
WendellBerry
|
And it begins there even in non-religious doctrines that proclaim the way to liberty and freedom - respect of individual rights to life and property means that you will not harm another person in their life or property, by committing the acts of fraud, theft, breaking contracts, and/or killing. Those acts are an infringement on individual rights Distributism is a philosophy based on subsidiarity such that the productive means to wealth creation should not be highly concentrated in private or collective hands. Therefore the use of coercive means - if necessary - to achieve this end is just. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Pat McCotter
|
And it begins there even in non-religious doctrines that proclaim the way to liberty and freedom - respect of individual rights to life and property means that you will not harm another person in their life or property, by committing the acts of fraud, theft, breaking contracts, and/or killing. Those acts are an infringement on individual rights Distributism is a philosophy based on subsidiarity such that the productive means to wealth creation should not be highly concentrated in private or collective hands. Therefore the use of coercive means - if necessary - to achieve this end is just. No - it is not just. Business size is based on the firm's customers voluntarily buying from them or refraining from doing so. The business cannot force someone to buy from them. Telling a business it cannot grow beyond a certain size so someone else can do the same business is not just. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Visualize Whirled Peas
Give Pizza Chance
I think it's wrong that only one company makes the game Monopoly. - Steven Wright
|
|
|
|
John Edward Mercier
|
Ross, get use to it.
BOE keeps proposing that a Commonwealth is very different than a State... and that State was created in America, it wasn't
Because of the provisions of the original Massachussets' Constitution... it didn't require NH Constitution Part First Article Three.
The power granted to the Massachussets' Legislature circumventing self-governance came into being, as Adams would put it, under the 'Because I Said So' paradigm. It promoted taxation for religious teachings under its Article Three.
And by the way BOE, the Catholic Schools still teach the Ten Commandments. What the Pope is talking about isn't what your suggesting.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Dreepa
|
And by the way BOE, the Catholic Schools still teach the Ten Commandments. What the Pope is talking about isn't what your suggesting.
the Pope needs to add the 11th Commandment... no diddling little boys. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
BagOfEyebrows
|
And it begins there even in non-religious doctrines that proclaim the way to liberty and freedom - respect of individual rights to life and property means that you will not harm another person in their life or property, by committing the acts of fraud, theft, breaking contracts, and/or killing. Those acts are an infringement on individual rights Distributism is a philosophy based on subsidiarity such that the productive means to wealth creation should not be highly concentrated in private or collective hands. Therefore the use of coercive means - if necessary - to achieve this end is just. Justified use of force based on a philosophy that smacks of John Locke's 'enough as is good' theory? No thanks. Already been tried as the way to liberty, freedom and peace; it failed. Miserably. However, if you personally want to start a community based on that philosophy - have at it - just allow other types of communities built upon the numerous and varied other philosophies also get to try out their ideas... isn't that what liberty and freedom are, after all? Not a unified implementation of "ONE WAY" but an agreeance to allow "ALL WAYS" (as long as each individual consents and agrees to the terms and philosophy.) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
BagOfEyebrows
|
Ross, get use to it.
BOE keeps proposing that a Commonwealth is very different than a State... and that State was created in America, it wasn't
Because of the provisions of the original Massachussets' Constitution... it didn't require NH Constitution Part First Article Three.
The power granted to the Massachussets' Legislature circumventing self-governance came into being, as Adams would put it, under the 'Because I Said So' paradigm. It promoted taxation for religious teachings under its Article Three.
And by the way BOE, the Catholic Schools still teach the Ten Commandments. What the Pope is talking about isn't what your suggesting.
we'll go over the constitution of Massachusetts sentence by sentence; you're very, very, very wrong about John Adams making it so that any branch of government in Massachusetts was able to circumvent self-governance. He wouldn't even have allowed the manmade system of law to do that - And - in Massachusetts (and gosh knows what other states), in order for a Catholic school to get accreditation, it can NOT teach the 10 Commandments. I know of this because a Catholic nun told me herself what had happened - I doubt she was lying about it. Would it help for you to just call the school yourself and find out? Seeing as you won't take my word on it, how about you just call and verify it before you go calilng me a liar: http://www.achs.net/:p |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
