Author Topic: Expanding our reach  (Read 32281 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Doug Loss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,360
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Tennessean
Expanding our reach
« on: November 16, 2016, 03:59:22 pm »
A while ago, one of the Trumpers called us (I was a NeverTrumper) “leaderless malcontents” after Ted Cruz endorsed Trump, which I took to heart. Yes, I glory in not being led, but thinking and deciding for myself. And malcontent? Darned straight! If you’re not malcontented with the state of the country today, there’s something WRONG with you!

Then I had this idea:

‘You know, that may be the beginning of a way to revitalize the conservative movement. There are many malcontented people in the country today, but who feel they have no place to go that represents them. If we can present our philosophy to them, separate from the label “conservative” which both the Dems and the GOP have fairly successfully painted as distasteful, we may be able to grow up a new cohort of liberty-minded individualists. The “malcontents” I’m talking about are those quiet people (of all races and ethnicities, not just those we’ve previously thought of as fruitful ground for conservatives) who feel that there’s no one and no group who represents their beliefs, desires, and hopes for the future. They are the ones we need to find and welcome. It bears some thinking about.

‘I’m saying, let’s get back to our original principles. Let’s drop all the political terminology, the dogma we’ve acquired over the years, and try to engage the people looking for something to believe in, some way out of the malaise the left has imposed on the country. Let’s try to build a positive spirit of individualism, of ability, of responsibility for our rights and those of others. Let’s give those people something to believe in, not just railing at those who try to hold them back.’

I’ve started writing up a statement of belief, something of a foundational document for this concept. I’m sure it can be improved, and the language smoothed. I present it to you for whatever usefulness you may find in it.
My political philosophy:

1) I'm not bothering anybody.
2) It's none of your business.
3) Leave me alone!

Offline Doug Loss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,360
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Tennessean
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2016, 04:01:17 pm »
I thought I'd attached this to the previous message, but I guess not.  Here it is (I hope).

[attachment deleted by admin]
My political philosophy:

1) I'm not bothering anybody.
2) It's none of your business.
3) Leave me alone!

Offline EC

  • Shanghaied Editor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,804
  • Gender: Male
  • Cats rule. Dogs drool.
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #2 on: November 16, 2016, 04:05:12 pm »
Putting this above the fold.

Do me a favor? Copy from the doc into a post in this thread - a lot of people are (rightfully) leery of attachments.
The universe doesn't hate you. Unless your name is Tsutomu Yamaguchi

Avatar courtesy of Oceander

I've got a website now: Smoke and Ink

Offline Doug Loss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,360
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Tennessean
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #3 on: November 16, 2016, 05:10:56 pm »
Putting this above the fold.

Do me a favor? Copy from the doc into a post in this thread - a lot of people are (rightfully) leery of attachments.

OK, but it's a bit long and I didn't want to inconvenience anyone....
My political philosophy:

1) I'm not bothering anybody.
2) It's none of your business.
3) Leave me alone!

Offline EC

  • Shanghaied Editor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23,804
  • Gender: Male
  • Cats rule. Dogs drool.
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #4 on: November 16, 2016, 05:13:01 pm »
It's cool (and also a VERY fine bit of work).
The universe doesn't hate you. Unless your name is Tsutomu Yamaguchi

Avatar courtesy of Oceander

I've got a website now: Smoke and Ink

Offline Doug Loss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,360
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Tennessean
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #5 on: November 16, 2016, 05:14:15 pm »
What We Believe

We believe that all people have certain rights, which are theirs from birth and which cannot be taken from them. Many people believe these rights to be imbued by God the Creator; others see them as inherent to consciousness and self-awareness. But all agree that these rights are fundamental to all people. These include the right to live, the right to speak freely and without retribution, the right to own property and do with it anything they desire, the right to live their lives in the way they desire, the right to associate with others or to refrain from associating with others, the right to defend themselves against any attacks by others, and the right to defend others exercising the same rights when those others are attacked. These rights are absolute; they can only be restrained when exercising them would interfere with the rights of others to exercise the same rights.

This is not an exhaustive list of the rights people are born with. There are certainly other rights that are inherent with existence, but which we haven’t specified here. There are some rights that might be thought of as growing from the rights listed, but which others might consider individual rights.

You will notice that these rights are not predicated on any particular personal characteristic or on membership in any particular group. These are rights inherent to all people. They inhere to the individual, not to any group.

From these rights grow the concepts of freedom and liberty. “Freedom” is the condition of being free of restraints, especially the ability to act without control or interference by another or by circumstance. It also includes the capacity to act by choice rather than by determination. “Liberty” is a similar concept, the condition of being free from oppressive restriction or control by a government or other power. The rights listed above show that we believe all people are born free. To achieve liberty they must accept only those restrictions upon their freedom that they agree to, acting in consort with other individuals. An example would be agreeing to work together to provide for the defense of the group all belong to rather than each individual trying to defend only himself and those he’s responsible for.

The Right to Live

The right to live is fundamental; without life no other right has meaning. Intentionally depriving an innocent person of his life is a crime in every civilized society in existence. The only legitimate reasons for depriving another person of his life are the defense of yourself or another person who is in danger of being killed, or conviction for a capital crime after having been tried by a jury of peers. Anything else is immoral and outside the bounds of civilized behavior.

The determination of personhood is one fraught with difficulty. In times past, the personhood of people was denied because of ethnicity, religion, mental capacity, and various other criteria. We believe that none of these criteria are valid determinants of personhood. A human being is a person from birth until death, automatically and without qualification.

Many believe that personhood imbues a human being even before birth. There are varied beliefs about when an unborn human being becomes a person—some believe this occurs at conception, some when the heart starts beating, some when a response to pain is evident, some when brain activity begins, some when viability outside the womb is possible. But almost none of us believe that personhood only begins at birth. For this reason abortion, particularly late-term and partial-birth abortion, is widely considered immoral and unconscionable.

The Right to Speak Freely and Without Retribution

All people have the right to say whatever they want to say, without fear of retribution. Attempts to prevent others from speaking or to prevent them from being heard because their views disagree with those of the people making the attempts are unacceptable. Rebuttals of disagreeable speech are of course allowed, as such discussion will allow all points of view to be heard.

The right to speak without retribution makes the imposition of speech codes and the public shaming of those voicing unpopular opinions immoral and deplorable. Such activities are not acceptable in a free society. Such actions only serve to show those who do them to be unable to defend their beliefs against opposition.

The Right to Own Property and Do With It Anything You Desire

Everyone has the right to own property and to use it in any way he wants providing he doesn’t interfere with the rights of others in doing so. There is no moral right to restrict a person from using his property as he sees fit. A person can voluntarily agree to restrictions as a condition of acquiring the property, but restrictions imposed after the acquisition of the property are immoral and should not be allowed. The taking of personal property for a societal good (the concept of imminent domain) should only be allowed for a demonstrable benefit to society in general, and with adequate compensation to the owner, not because some authority believes that a different owner would provide the authority itself with some benefit.

The Right to Live Your Life in the Way You Desire

So long as you aren’t harming others or interfering with their exercise of their rights, you are free to live your life however you wish to. You have no moral requirement to get someone else’s permission to do the things you want to do. Of course, no one else is under any moral obligation to do the things you want them to do just because you say so. This right is related to the right to speak freely, the right to associate with those you want to and to not associate with those you don’t, and the right to defend yourself and others from harm. At its base, this right is what the concept of “liberty” means.

The Right to Associate With Others or to Refrain From Associating With Others

You have the moral right to associate with anyone you would like to, and the moral right to not associate with those you find undesirable. No one may force you into associations you don’t desire, or to forbid you to associate with others at your discretion. The right to privacy comes from this fundamental right, as well as the right of security of your personal information. As well, the right to refuse entry to your property to anyone including agents of the government is derived from this right. If you are a business owner or service provider, the right to decide what services or products you provide and the conditions under which you provide them are also derived from this right.

The Right to Defend Yourself Against Attacks by Others

The right to life would be meaningless without the inherent right to defend yourself against attack. You have the absolute right to do so. You also have the right to possess the means of defending yourself, both the objects necessary for that defense and the training and ability to employ those objects competently. This right is unalienable, meaning it can neither be taken from you, nor can you give it up. You always possess it.

“Attack” does not refer exclusively to physical assault. You can be attacked physically, verbally, socially, financially, and in other ways. You always have the right to defend yourself against attacks of any sort.

The Right to Defend Others When They are Attacked

We all recognize that there are some who are unable to defend themselves (the young and the infirm are two examples) against attack. You have the right to defend others who are under attack just as you may defend yourself. Defending others against attack is one of the basic principles of civilized behavior. It is sometimes difficult not to attack the attackers yourself, but doing so is not defending others. Your right to defend others only extends to protecting them from attack and stopping the attack itself.

Current Reality

We recognize that many of the fundamental rights defined above are being abrogated or denied in our society today. That doesn’t invalidate these rights, it merely acknowledges that our society is imperfect. We believe that we must work to change society in all its aspects so these rights are fully recognized and accepted, and are allowed to all people. Only when everyone has freedom and liberty, will we have freedom and liberty.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2016, 05:16:28 pm by Doug Loss »
My political philosophy:

1) I'm not bothering anybody.
2) It's none of your business.
3) Leave me alone!

Offline Doug Loss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,360
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Tennessean
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #6 on: November 16, 2016, 05:14:50 pm »
It's cool (and also a VERY fine bit of work).

Thanks, I really appreciate that.
My political philosophy:

1) I'm not bothering anybody.
2) It's none of your business.
3) Leave me alone!

Offline TomSea

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 40,432
  • Gender: Male
  • All deserve a trial if accused
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #7 on: November 16, 2016, 07:50:27 pm »
Trump Pence are way better than Cruz, who has accomplished little in the Pro-Life movement.

Rick Perry, even Christie and Kasich have done more.

Offline Doug Loss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,360
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Tennessean
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #8 on: November 16, 2016, 08:01:02 pm »
Trump Pence are way better than Cruz, who has accomplished little in the Pro-Life movement.

Rick Perry, even Christie and Kasich have done more.

Kind of missing the point of this topic, you know...
My political philosophy:

1) I'm not bothering anybody.
2) It's none of your business.
3) Leave me alone!

Offline LateForLunch

  • GOTWALMA Get Out of the Way and Leave Me Alone! (Nods to Teebone)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,349
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #9 on: November 16, 2016, 09:33:56 pm »
A while ago, one of the Trumpers called us (I was a NeverTrumper) “leaderless malcontents” after Ted Cruz endorsed Trump, which I took to heart. Yes, I glory in not being led, but thinking and deciding for myself. And malcontent? Darned straight! If you’re not malcontented with the state of the country today, there’s something WRONG with you!

Then I had this idea:

‘You know, that may be the beginning of a way to revitalize the conservative movement. There are many malcontented people in the country today, but who feel they have no place to go that represents them. If we can present our philosophy to them, separate from the label “conservative” which both the Dems and the GOP have fairly successfully painted as distasteful, we may be able to grow up a new cohort of liberty-minded individualists. The “malcontents” I’m talking about are those quiet people (of all races and ethnicities, not just those we’ve previously thought of as fruitful ground for conservatives) who feel that there’s no one and no group who represents their beliefs, desires, and hopes for the future. They are the ones we need to find and welcome. It bears some thinking about.

‘I’m saying, let’s get back to our original principles. Let’s drop all the political terminology, the dogma we’ve acquired over the years, and try to engage the people looking for something to believe in, some way out of the malaise the left has imposed on the country. Let’s try to build a positive spirit of individualism, of ability, of responsibility for our rights and those of others. Let’s give those people something to believe in, not just railing at those who try to hold them back.’

I’ve started writing up a statement of belief, something of a foundational document for this concept. I’m sure it can be improved, and the language smoothed. I present it to you for whatever usefulness you may find in it.

Well, Benjamin Franklin said that to persuade others, it is not enough to appeal to intellect. To persuade one must appeal to interest.

Buckminster Fuller wrote a book titled "Critical Path" which proposes a non-political method for achieving both a better world and a movement to accomplish it which is beyond politics.

Fuller was a proponent of the belief that technology is the only thing in culture which transcends ideology. Regardless of the ideals of a culture, even if they are utterly consumed or eradicated as a philosophical force, whatever technology a culture achieves remains even after their form of government is no more.

Examining history shows that this is true. Even though the Roman Empire vanished into history, the system of building aqueducts they developed remained part of the world's enduring technology forever.

The Etruscan empire is no more, but we still use the alphabet that they created. Same for the ancient Hindu and Arabic cultures which created our modern base-10 numerical system.

The Mongol Empire which once was the largest Empire in the history of Humanity left behind gun powder and firearms (which they introduced to the world but never perfected) even after the Khanates destroyed themselves through civil conflicts (aided by famines and droughts) which left them open to decimation by sundry and various less-potent military forces.

Even if we were atom bombed (God's forbid) by the North Koreans, all of the technology U.S. scientists and businesses have created would remain part of the world.

Manufacturing techniques which permitted mass production of products forever made machines once only affordable to the rich, available to everyone.

This last element is the key to Fuller's entire philosophy. He points out the fact that mass market capitalism has been the socialist's best friend in our time, because it is through technological innovation financed and fueled by free-market economics, that the average standard of living along with the average lifespan of the lowest economic classes in the world has constantly elevated.

It was not any political philosophy per se which enabled the poor to avoid starvation by application of improved land management, refrigeration, food processing, nutrition/medical research and development so much as the technology itself which made all of those things affordable to the common man.

There is a lot more in the book about how technology is probably the best mechanism for creating a movement that is beyond politics (he proposes a Real Wealth-based credit economy to replace both the monetary system and the investment banking industry).

He also has a spiritual side to him which sounds much like the manifesto in this thread.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2016, 09:41:07 pm by LateForLunch »
GOTWALMA Get out of the way and leave me alone! (Nods to General Teebone)

Offline Doug Loss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,360
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Tennessean
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #10 on: November 16, 2016, 09:42:37 pm »
Well, Benjamin Franklin said that to persuade others, it is not enough to appeal to intellect. To persuade one must appeal to interest.

Well, I think the beliefs I tried to describe in my document ought to appeal to the interest of pretty much anyone who doesn't want to be ruled and controlled by others, but wants to be free to make his or her own decisions to the greatest extent possible.  I'm hoping to get some assistance in getting this whole concept polished and promoted to America in general.
My political philosophy:

1) I'm not bothering anybody.
2) It's none of your business.
3) Leave me alone!

Offline LateForLunch

  • GOTWALMA Get Out of the Way and Leave Me Alone! (Nods to Teebone)
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,349
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #11 on: November 16, 2016, 09:49:59 pm »
Well, I think the beliefs I tried to describe in my document ought to appeal to the interest of pretty much anyone who doesn't want to be ruled and controlled by others, but wants to be free to make his or her own decisions to the greatest extent possible.  I'm hoping to get some assistance in getting this whole concept polished and promoted to America in general.

With all due respect (and that is great) it will certainly appeal to THINKING type personalities.

Sadly, a large and apparently growing portion of our culture seems to be feeling/intuition-centered personalities who are not easily motivated or inspired to action by rationality- even very potent, compelling rational arguments.

Please don't take that as discouragement, (big things have small beginnings).

It's just that I think Fuller has given this very topic a great deal of thought and did a lot of research into his book directly related to the central thesis (which your aspiration shares).

He was an avowed free market capitalist who saw over and over again first hand how technology applied and managed correctly could turn deserts into oases and forests into neighborhoods (he developed the Brazilian infrastructure in the 1970s).

I think he might have some things to contribute to develop a working philosophy which can appeal to both self described conservatives and those who may describe themselves otherwise because it is in a framework that is deliberately placed outside conventional political sensibilities.   
« Last Edit: November 16, 2016, 09:57:01 pm by LateForLunch »
GOTWALMA Get out of the way and leave me alone! (Nods to General Teebone)

Offline Doug Loss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,360
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Tennessean
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #12 on: November 16, 2016, 09:55:55 pm »
With all due respect (and that is great) it will certainly appeal to THINKING type personalities.

Sadly, a large and apparently growing portion of our culture seems to be feeling/intuition-centered personalities who are not easily motivated or inspired to action by matters that appeal to rationality.

Please don't take that as discouragement, (big things have small beginnings).

It's just that I think Fuller has given this very topic a great deal of thought and did a lot of research into his book directly related to the central thesis (which your aspiration shares).

He was an avowed free market capitalist who saw over and over again first hand how technology applied and managed correctly could turn deserts into oases and forests into neighborhoods (he developed the Brazilian infrastructure in the 1970s).

I think he might have some things to contribute to develop a working philosophy which can appeal to both self described conservatives and those who may describe themselves otherwise.

Noted.  I'll take a look at "Critical Path" as soon as I have a chance.  But would non-THINKING type personalities read a document such as I'm working on anyway?  For them, perhaps a video presentation would be best.  I'm not ready (or probably the best person for it anyway) to make one of those.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2016, 09:57:34 pm by Doug Loss »
My political philosophy:

1) I'm not bothering anybody.
2) It's none of your business.
3) Leave me alone!

Offline Smokin Joe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 56,591
  • I was a "conspiracy theorist". Now I'm just right.
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #13 on: November 16, 2016, 10:37:30 pm »
Trump Pence are way better than Cruz, who has accomplished little in the Pro-Life movement.

Rick Perry, even Christie and Kasich have done more.
There you go again... **nononono*
How God must weep at humans' folly! Stand fast! God knows what he is doing!
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

C S Lewis

Offline Smokin Joe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 56,591
  • I was a "conspiracy theorist". Now I'm just right.
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #14 on: November 16, 2016, 10:57:17 pm »
Well, I think the beliefs I tried to describe in my document ought to appeal to the interest of pretty much anyone who doesn't want to be ruled and controlled by others, but wants to be free to make his or her own decisions to the greatest extent possible.  I'm hoping to get some assistance in getting this whole concept polished and promoted to America in general.
A nice expansion on concepts fundamental to the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.
Defense of self and others:

I would add to the concept of defending against someone who attacks, the Right to defense extends to non-lethal attacks as well. The measure of force certainly should reflect the seriousness of the attack and not be wildly disproportionate, but in many states the standard for employing lethal force is the attacker placing their victim in the immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Neither the intended victim nor their defender, if such is the case, should be held responsible for the effects of a defense against attack on the attacker, in either Criminal or Civil court.
 
Serious injury is injury which would require hospitalization or medical treatment including but not limited to internal injuries, broken bones, sutures, or surgical remediation. I would note that rape is included as a form of "serious injury", and that lethal force is permitted in the defense of self or another against forcible rape.

(While in the criminal courts, a charge of Homicide requires a person to die, a lethal force defense may be mounted against someone who would only cripple you.
The universal practical caution is that a fleeing suspect is seldom considered a lethal threat, the entry wounds should be in front.)

How God must weep at humans' folly! Stand fast! God knows what he is doing!
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

C S Lewis

Offline Doug Loss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,360
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Tennessean
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #15 on: November 16, 2016, 11:29:57 pm »
A nice expansion on concepts fundamental to the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.
Defense of self and others:

I would add to the concept of defending against someone who attacks, the Right to defense extends to non-lethal attacks as well. The measure of force certainly should reflect the seriousness of the attack and not be wildly disproportionate, but in many states the standard for employing lethal force is the attacker placing their victim in the immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Neither the intended victim nor their defender, if such is the case, should be held responsible for the effects of a defense against attack on the attacker, in either Criminal or Civil court.
 
Serious injury is injury which would require hospitalization or medical treatment including but not limited to internal injuries, broken bones, sutures, or surgical remediation. I would note that rape is included as a form of "serious injury", and that lethal force is permitted in the defense of self or another against forcible rape.

(While in the criminal courts, a charge of Homicide requires a person to die, a lethal force defense may be mounted against someone who would only cripple you.
The universal practical caution is that a fleeing suspect is seldom considered a lethal threat, the entry wounds should be in front.)

I tried to stay to the general and not get too specific in my statement of beliefs.  I didn't mention anything about lethality/non-lethality; in fact, I didn't limit the defense of self and others to physical attacks, but tried to include attacks of all sorts.  Please let me know if the wording wasn't clear on that point--I want to make this as understandable as possible.
My political philosophy:

1) I'm not bothering anybody.
2) It's none of your business.
3) Leave me alone!

Offline Smokin Joe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 56,591
  • I was a "conspiracy theorist". Now I'm just right.
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #16 on: November 16, 2016, 11:59:03 pm »
I tried to stay to the general and not get too specific in my statement of beliefs.  I didn't mention anything about lethality/non-lethality; in fact, I didn't limit the defense of self and others to physical attacks, but tried to include attacks of all sorts.  Please let me know if the wording wasn't clear on that point--I want to make this as understandable as possible.
The comment was meant as a sidebar, I suppose. The problem with getting Short Attention Span America to read anything longer than a paragraph that isn't about something salacious, is that if you get involved enough to explain it thoroughly, you lose them.

I think the point I wanted to get across was lethal force should be an option if an attacker places a person under the threat of severe injury as well as just death.

 

How God must weep at humans' folly! Stand fast! God knows what he is doing!
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

C S Lewis

Offline bigheadfred

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,588
  • Gender: Male
  • One day Closer
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #17 on: November 17, 2016, 12:22:55 am »
The comment was meant as a sidebar, I suppose. The problem with getting Short Attention Span America to read anything longer than a paragraph that isn't about something salacious, is that if you get involved enough to explain it thoroughly, you lose them.

I think the point I wanted to get across was lethal force should be an option if an attacker places a person under the threat of severe injury as well as just death.

It would or should be something about perceived intent.
She asked me name my foe then. I said the need within some men to fight and kill their brothers without thought of Love or God. Ken Hensley

Offline bigheadfred

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18,588
  • Gender: Male
  • One day Closer
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #18 on: November 17, 2016, 12:23:41 am »
I'll read all of this later. Bookmark.
She asked me name my foe then. I said the need within some men to fight and kill their brothers without thought of Love or God. Ken Hensley

Offline Sanguine

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 35,986
  • Gender: Female
  • Ex-member
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #19 on: November 17, 2016, 12:26:19 am »
Yes, me too.  Bookmark.

Offline Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 51,489
  • Gender: Male
  • Resistance to Tyrants is Obedience to God
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #20 on: November 17, 2016, 12:38:28 am »
A nice expansion on concepts fundamental to the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.
Defense of self and others:

I would add to the concept of defending against someone who attacks, the Right to defense extends to non-lethal attacks as well. The measure of force certainly should reflect the seriousness of the attack and not be wildly disproportionate, but in many states the standard for employing lethal force is the attacker placing their victim in the immediate danger of serious injury or death.

Neither the intended victim nor their defender, if such is the case, should be held responsible for the effects of a defense against attack on the attacker, in either Criminal or Civil court.
 
Serious injury is injury which would require hospitalization or medical treatment including but not limited to internal injuries, broken bones, sutures, or surgical remediation. I would note that rape is included as a form of "serious injury", and that lethal force is permitted in the defense of self or another against forcible rape.

(While in the criminal courts, a charge of Homicide requires a person to die, a lethal force defense may be mounted against someone who would only cripple you.
The universal practical caution is that a fleeing suspect is seldom considered a lethal threat, the entry wounds should be in front.)

I was about to post a similar comment but thank goodness I read through the thread first!  I agree on all counts!  Well done!
"I wish it need not have happened in my time," said Frodo.

"So do I," said Gandalf, "and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
- J. R. R. Tolkien

Offline Frank Cannon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26,097
  • Gender: Male
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #21 on: November 17, 2016, 12:44:03 am »
Trump Pence are way better than Cruz, who has accomplished little in the Pro-Life movement.

Rick Perry, even Christie and Kasich have done more.

Just when someone makes a serious point, in stumbles Tom all out of sorts spewing non-sequiturs.

Are you incapable of keeping your stupid bullshit to yourself or finding a thread where it is relevant?

Offline Doug Loss

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,360
  • Gender: Male
  • Proud Tennessean
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #22 on: November 17, 2016, 09:04:15 pm »
Presenting this document to you all for critique was just the first part of my idea.  Assuming it's in good enough shape (or after it's been tweaked to make it in good enough shape), how can we use it (or should we use it) to start a conversation with those folks who would agree with us on most if not all these concepts but who would never consider identifying as "conservative"?  I'm thinking religious blacks, many hispanics, a lot of the union rank-and-file, etc.  I look forward to your thoughts.
My political philosophy:

1) I'm not bothering anybody.
2) It's none of your business.
3) Leave me alone!

Offline AllThatJazzZ

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,590
  • Gender: Female
  • Adopt your next pet, preferably a senior.
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #23 on: November 17, 2016, 09:31:53 pm »
Bookmark


A government big enough to give you everything you want
is a government big enough to take away everything you have.


Offline Smokin Joe

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 56,591
  • I was a "conspiracy theorist". Now I'm just right.
Re: Expanding our reach
« Reply #24 on: November 17, 2016, 09:40:55 pm »
Presenting this document to you all for critique was just the first part of my idea.  Assuming it's in good enough shape (or after it's been tweaked to make it in good enough shape), how can we use it (or should we use it) to start a conversation with those folks who would agree with us on most if not all these concepts but who would never consider identifying as "conservative"?  I'm thinking religious blacks, many hispanics, a lot of the union rank-and-file, etc.  I look forward to your thoughts.
Although sample bias is always present in such, how about taking each issue, each Right in the Bill of Rights, and a few other basic concerns and making a 'What kind of government do you really want' poll. Avoiding specific issues, base it on the framework of rights, and those rights applying to everyone, not just one side or the other. It would have to be put up on an apolitical site to get a less biased sample, and it would likely get people who are polarized one way or another on the political spectrum, anyway.

There are no guarantees it would not be botted or "FReeped" by some with a specific political interest, but avoiding specific issues might help.

A series of articles, neutral in tone, citing the benefits of each Right and the result of not having it, moght be another approach.
How God must weep at humans' folly! Stand fast! God knows what he is doing!
Seventeen Techniques for Truth Suppression

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

C S Lewis