Migration Nightmares Hitting Europe

#551
#551
95 Vol Alum said:
I think the bleach drinking and can't wait til people of your ilk are dead comments got the ball rolling.
Click to expand...

They did. Man do persons in here feel justified outrage at someone for merely insulting them and hoping that something bad might happen to them. Goodness, we can only imagine the justified outrage towards persons who think it right to close borders and force desperate refugees to stay in a violently atrocious situation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#552
#552
Carl Pickens said:
The bastard wished death on me Huff..... He's a condescending prick.... Most likely he's this way with most every one he interacts with.....including his family.
Click to expand...

Better to wish someone death than physically bar individuals from moving an entering a country to work and feed themselves. You support the latter. Kudos.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#553
#553
therealUT said:
Better to wish someone death than physically bar individuals from moving an entering a country to work and feed themselves. You support the latter. Kudos.
Click to expand...
Imagine there's no country, it isn't hard to do. Nothin' to live or die for, and no religion too.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#554
#554
Carl Pickens said:
The bastard wished death on me Huff..... He's a condescending prick.... Most likely he's this way with most every one he interacts with.....including his family.
Click to expand...

Sounded more like a reinforcement of the notion that generational cycling breeds progress. In the macro, it's generally good for the older generations to relinquish power and control to the next, and often that is through death.

I think you're taking it too personal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#555
#555
Carl Pickens said:
The bastard wished death on me Huff..... He's a condescending prick.... Most likely he's this way with most every one he interacts with.....including his family.
Click to expand...

I think most of us are pricks. It's why we pour time into advertising our thoughts to be pitted against other pricks and their thoughts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#557
#557
therealUT said:
He is. I am. I live with the guilt and the shame every ****ing day. Nothing new, and I've never once attempted to justify it, particularly through some, "I was just obeying orders" BS. I knew what I was doing and I know I was in the wrong.
Click to expand...

But why is he referencing it ad nauseum? What point is he trying to make?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#564
#564
n_huffhines said:
I am so disappointed in people when they'd rather pay $11 for Applebees burgers when you can get tacos al pastor or pad thai noodles for $8.

There is a better, cheaper world out there people.
Click to expand...

Preach! They aren't even remotely good hamburgers. You can't get a good hamburger at a decent price anymore.

I usually just grill them myself. Nothing more disappointing that overcooked red meat.
 
#565
#565
n_huffhines said:
Wait, someone on VN is tormenting you for this? That's so ****ed up.
Click to expand...

Torments? Convenient way to frame things.

The resident philosopher doesnt get to call me racist(which I am not) as well as trash just because he does not like my views. But that is the route he chose so it was time to look at things honestly. You know, type of stuff that philosophers pride themselves on.

He freely chose to go to another person's land and kill them. Mind you, this is not an indictment on our military folk. Just pointing it out since he is so troubled with terms i've used, such as "crap neighborhoods."

I doubt going and killing people really jives with his philosophical views.
 
#566
#566
PKT_VOL said:
Preach! They aren't even remotely good hamburgers. You can't get a good hamburger at a decent price anymore.

I usually just grill them myself. Nothing more disappointing that overcooked red meat.
Click to expand...
How about putting your hand up your date's dress, and finding out she is a he? That would be more disappointing to me than overcooked red meat.

Also, finding out that the 2010 LSU-Tenn game wasn't over when it was over the first time was kind of disappointing too..
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#567
#567
therealUT said:
Bahn Mi fan?
Click to expand...

My wife is crazy about bahn mi. I'm fond of them but am somewhat snobbish about them (having the real thing all the time in Vietnam) and apprehensive after getting the worst food poisoning I have ever experienced.
 
#568
#568
1972 Grad said:
How about putting your hand up your date's dress, and finding out she is a he? That would be more disappointing to me than overcooked red meat.

Also, finding out that the 2010 LSU-Tenn game wasn't over when it was over the first time was kind of disappointing too..
Click to expand...

Why did you have to bring that up? I still can't get it out of my mind. I didn't notice the Adam's apple.
 
#569
#569
1972 Grad said:
How about putting your hand up your date's dress, and finding out she is a he? That would be more disappointing to me than overcooked red meat.

Also, finding out that the 2010 LSU-Tenn game wasn't over when it was over the first time was kind of disappointing too..
Click to expand...

If you need to put your hand up your date's dress to find out if she is a he, you have already lost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#572
#572
therealUT said:
I'd imagine a lot of posters on here would sooner go to a Chilis, Applebees, O'Charley's, etc., than walk into an honest-to-god hole-in-the-wall establishment serving street tacos.
Click to expand...

Depends on their preference. Some places have great street vendors. Others, not so much. If your not familiar with the community it's risky and you'll have flashbacks of the Oregon Trail...you have dysentery.
 
#574
#574
allvol123 said:
Torments? Convenient way to frame things.
Click to expand...

Don't worry, you haven't tormented me.

allvol123 said:
The resident philosopher doesn't get to call me racist(which I am not) as well as trash just because he does not like my views.
Click to expand...

Actually, I can call you whatever I please.

allvol123 said:
But that is the route he chose so it was time to look at things honestly. You know, type of stuff that philosophers pride themselves on.

He freely chose to go to another person's land and kill them. Mind you, this is not an indictment on our military folk. Just pointing it out since he is so troubled with terms i've used, such as "crap neighborhoods."

I doubt going and killing people really jives with his philosophical views.
Click to expand...

You are right, it doesn't jive with my philosophical views. Hence, why I view myself as having committed some grave injustices in my life.

But, at the end of the day, here's the thing: if you really want to avoid being called a racist/bigot/fascist, then maybe you should just stop being one.

If I am wrong in using these labels, then present your argument for your immigration stance. Here's a quick review of the arguments you offered thus far:

(1) You're for immigration so long as it is ordered. Yet, when I offered a solution in which there would exist order, you said that was not good enough.

(2) You're for immigration so long as it is good for the country. Yet, when I offered an interpretation, based on the DoI, on what 'good for the US' ought to mean, you rejected that interpretation and offered no interpretation of your own.

Thus, if you have an argument against unrestricted, yet regulated, immigration that cannot be construed as racist, bigoted, or fascist, then provide one. For, since your position is one in which persons would be denied a basic liberty, namely freedom of movement (which is quite obviously a natural right if there are any natural rights), then the burden of proof is on you. That is, when it comes to questions of restricting rights, the default position which needs no argument is always, "Don't restrict the rights unless there is a clear and obvious necessity."

Analogously, it is never the defender of the freedom of speech who has to offer a positive argument for the freedom of speech; it is those opposed who must offer convincing arguments and the defender of the freedom counters those arguments.

It is never the defender of the freedom to conduct consensual transactions who has to offer a positive argument for consensual transactions.

It is never the defender of the right to life who has to offer positive arguments as to why others cannot kill him/her.

It's the same with freedom of movement. If you are opposed to such a right, then the burden is on you to offer a clear and convincing argument. And, if you cannot offer such an argument or will not offer such an argument, then others are more than free to either simply declare that your position is absolutely unsubstantiated or to wonder about and voice what they see as possible reasons you might have for your conclusion but reasons that you are not willing to share.

I've opined that those reasons are rooted in racism, bigotry, and fascism. And, until you offer your argument, I am more than free to assume such.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#575
#575
therealUT said:
Don't worry, you haven't tormented me.



Actually, I can call you whatever I please.



You are right, it doesn't jive with my philosophical views. Hence, why I view myself as having committed some grave injustices in my life.

But, at the end of the day, here's the thing: if you really want to avoid being called a racist/bigot/fascist, then maybe you should just stop being one.

If I am wrong in using these labels, then present your argument for your immigration stance. Here's a quick review of the arguments you offered thus far:

(1) You're for immigration so long as it is ordered. Yet, when I offered a solution in which there would exist order, you said that was not good enough.

(2) You're for immigration so long as it is good for the country. Yet, when I offered an interpretation, based on the DoI, on what 'good for the US' ought to mean, you rejected that interpretation and offered no interpretation of your own.

Thus, if you have an argument against unrestricted, yet regulated, immigration that cannot be construed as racist, bigoted, or fascist, then provide one. For, since your position is one in which persons would be denied a basic liberty, namely freedom of movement (which is quite obviously a natural right if there are any natural rights), then the burden of proof is on you. That is, when it comes to questions of restricting rights, the default position which needs no argument is always, "Don't restrict the rights unless there is a clear and obvious necessity."

Analogously, it is never the defender of the freedom of speech who has to offer a positive argument for the freedom of speech; it is those opposed who must offer convincing arguments and the defender of the freedom counters those arguments.

It is never the defender of the freedom to conduct consensual transactions who has to offer a positive argument for consensual transactions.

It is never the defender of the right to life who has to offer positive arguments as to why others cannot kill him/her.

It's the same with freedom of movement. If you are opposed to such a right, then the burden is on you to offer a clear and convincing argument. And, if you cannot offer such an argument or will not offer such an argument, then others are more than free to either simply declare that your position is absolutely unsubstantiated or to wonder about and voice what they see as possible reasons you might have for your conclusion but reasons that you are not willing to share.

I've opined that those reasons are rooted in racism, bigotry, and fascism. And, until you offer your argument, I am more than free to assume such.
Click to expand...
How do you feel about unrestricted immigration to California, when there isn't enough water for the people who are there now?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top