Quote:
Originally Posted by noachian
Wrong actually; Parliament is an active body of the Crown and evolved from the Crown. The Monarch simply reprisents the Crown, isn't the total sum of it. That is one point I have been trying to get across.
|
That wasn't my point.
Quote:
|
Ok; Smidhey, I refuse to counter argue to you, becaause one can't possibly win. You said in another thread that, I quote "You do not have the right to educate somebody" yet whatever I put on this blasted forum you seem to pop up and try to educate me.
|
Indeed - but you don't have to listen and be educated (which you are clearly doing
).
Just because I don't have the right to educate doesn't mean I can't try if you are willing to listen (and vice versa). I don't have a right to live in a house - but I still do.
Quote:
|
So I am TELLING, as another human being with the right to tell you all I like (whether you actually take onboard any of my telling is up to your own self-justification); you are clearly a republican and a libertarian; not one as a result of the other. From your attitude towards the Crown and your somewhat ill-educated arguments against its benefits in this and other threads, you are clearly a republican because you dissagree with the Monarchy, not because you believe in self-ownership.
|
I'm a republican because I'm a libertarian, sorry. A libertarian cannot support someone who makes pro-EU speeches (such as Prince Charles).
If the monarchy was absolute and enacted only libertarian policies - then I would not be a republican, but as you stated in another thread - you are talking about the British monarchy, which is sadly not libertarian and supports very much the opposite (as shown by Prince Charles' speech to the EU).
Quote:
|
I have read John Locke, I have studied and read him through and through, and I have got to say that he is one very wise and honourable man. But unfortunetly the way you seem to express his values in your own opinions is quite anti-social. At least that is what is seems; but forgive me if I have missunderstood you (I know alot about that from our recent disscussions).
|
I will forgive you because you couldn't be more wrong. You know nothing about my personal life and I would prefer if you kept opinions about how I act around others to yourself.
Furthermore, this is a conversation about the monarchy - not about society. You have done this again and again, the two are not the same thing. My arguments against the state simply cannot be applied to society and to do so is a straw man on your part.
Quote:
|
The thing is Smidgey; from what you put, your atitudes and language you actually seem like the type of person I would get along great with; but because you express youself of in such an arrogant manner; it makes it hard for me to even argue with you.
|
Right back at you.
Quote:
|
I am loyal to what the crown reprisents. I am aware of its faliures as everything fails in life. I am grateful and loyal to our Queen (yes our Queen, despite your self-deluded concludions).
|
Your queen, not mine.
Further, notice how you call me arrogant and yet in two threads you have implied that I am immoral and a liar and just not called me self-deluded.
Quote:
|
I am fully aware that I own myself, and that had the Crown not been there at all my rights as a human being would still be there. But it is not the fact that it is the law that makes something 'right'; but because the law punishes those who violate these 'rights' I am grateful to it. I recall you saying "I do not dissagree with murder because it is the law..etcetc" along those lines....NIETHER DOES ANYBODY! No-body; I repeat NO-BODY dissagrees with murder because it is against the law, it is because it violates the human right to live that it is wrong, but we are gratful to the law for punishing those who do commit this, not gratful to the law just because it says murder is wrong...no-body on earth thinks that.
|
Then why do you state that me being moral because it is right and not because of the law is something that you cannot believe? You have just contradicted yourself here. I have never followed the law (in the criminal sense - obviously I had to in the civil sense to get a job and such) and for some reason you do not believe that in the other thread, yet you contradict that very notion here.
Quote:
|
I believe "In a balanced constitution, a Commonwealth based on equality and freedom of speech, and a Monarchy which values above all the liberty of the subject." that is basically what I believe; because I do not believe in anarchy; much like you seem to express. Yet nor do I believe in collective-authoritarianism. I am free to do as my rights permit me.
|
Okay, but then why do you go onto say this:
Quote:
|
I have the right ot educate you if you are wrong,
|
Which contradicts what you just said...
Quote:
|
I have the right to live my lifestyle as I please so long as it does not violate the rights of other men; but unlike you I do not live in my own self-justified one-man society, I live in a society of other men, ones who work together as brothers, yet still maintain their individual rights and lives. I would advise that you accept a similar moddel...or is it to collectivist for you?
|
So do I! This is extremely frustrating. Do you actually read what I write?