I am not certain why there is so much anger or need to argue from you MaineShark. I am asking for help in organizing and finding people interested in making lives better everywhere, encompassing not only liberty but compassion and honesty as well.
I have no interest in the breasts discussion merely for its irrelevance to the tasks at hand. Tasks that you are offered to help in but certainly not required to. As you stated in your reply, you have already begun many steps through your own personal revolucion de su mente. I offer only peace and kindness and a desire for fortuitous discussions.
It weakens my belief in the Shire Forum organization for its actions of doling out a -2 karma on me. I have not offered any hostility nor anger. In its stead, I have delivered knowledge, perspectives and alerts. If I am a negative influence on this forum, I humbly apologize and hope it can be understood that this was never any intention of mine.
A system that deals with artificial karma points from the narrow view of a few administrator elite, has just been exposed as biased, unintentionally, by its own application. Little can separate that behavior from the suppressionist actions of a Tsarist or Communist Russia, Catholic/Protestant or Nazi Germany, Monarch or Parliment led Britain and certainly not from the Nobility or Corporatocracy States of North America.
We must be certain that in our zealous pursuit of liberty we do not succumb to rights becoming synonymous with similar viewpoints to our own. In short, rather than decide as a whole whether breasts should absolutely be allowed or banned, it is left to communities to decide. If a vote for toplessness ever makes it to the ballot and it is voted down by a large majority would you still fight for this? My point being, that if 3% of the population believes toplessness is a very important right, why should that trump the other 97%?
You could start the Fascist Titty Party. The members can be referred to as TITS. Whole rallies of TITS could revolutionize humanity. I think it would win some votes in parliamentary elections.
I'll reply as requested to MaineShark.
Translation: you don't like it when your hypocrisy is shown for what it is...Please read everything I have written. There has been no instance of hypocrisy. If so please show me and I shall work towards rectifying the situation.
You say one thing, one place, and then say the opposite, elsewhere.I was stating I was under the impression that YOU were diferentiating the two. I was incorrect as stated below.
No one has a right not to see things that offend them.If I take in all that you have said on this topic, I gather that you present that anyone can do whatever they want, whenever they want, wherever they want regardless of any other majorities objection. That is forcing YOUR will on others.
I did not say that one should be allowed, but not the other. I stated that exposed breasts (or, more to the point, nipples, since that's what seems to offend folks like you) are not nudity, whether they are male or female. Exposing genitalia is nudity; whether or not nudity is acceptable is a separate discussion.I misunderstood what you were presenting as mentioned above.
You have made an incorrect assumption however on things that offend me. I am NOT against nipples or bare breasts or any other things as discussed further below. I believe your animosity towards any objection to bare chests is what causes your lashing out.
To the point and to be CRYSTAL clear this time, even though I have stated earlier as such, I’ll mention again that I do NOT oppose bare breasts. I merely say that if the majority does not want it in their community then that is democracy and must be respected. To do the opposite would be coercive tyranny.
To be CLEARER to the point. THERE ARE TOO MANY IMPORTANT CHANGES AT WORK IN THE WORLD TO FOCUS ON SHIRT-FREE TITS!
Whether or not nudity is acceptable is the WHOLE discussion. Who gives you the superior right to decide what is nudity over another? Once again an example of the similarity of Tsarist tyranny has been shown. Only the majority of a community can decide for public. Private should never be regulated.
I take if you've never actually been any place where public nudity is commonly practiced? It's less sexual than tight clothes. Societies where nudity is not stigmatized have far lower levels of sex offenses than repressed societies.You’ve made so many assumptions and insults in your responses and this another example.
I’ve been to many nude beaches and nudist camps. Not a single time have I been offended. Actually, I have had nothing but wonderful times. You however are taking an example of responsible adults and irresponsibly assuming everyone can be trusted the same. You may have children of your own and/or relatives of a young age. Now while you may be qualified to raise them and not be a pedder ass, that does not mean just anyone has the same qualities. Meaning, you can’t trust everyone with such responsibility. Sex offenders exist and would love a world of naked children to exploit.
What statistics of nude societies are you using? Amazonoian or Indonesian tribes? Outside of that, these civilizations you speak of have not existed since fire was being used in caves.
The world is a very different world with many layers of consciousness that are quite removed from hunt, forage, wood, fire, cook, shit, sleep. In that long ago world, yes, nudity was probably less of a problem. It should be noted though that violent rape was rampant. Not certain if it was due to nudity or not.
I find it amusing that you say you won't respond to this topic, but insert phrases like, "please inform me." In any case, no, that is not a reasonable request. And if it's not a reasonable request, then it certainly isn't reasonable to demand it, as you do.It certainly is reasonable for communities to make requests. If not then it is one government tyranny.
In other words, you're just a hypocrite. If it's a right you don't care about, then it "can be viewed as inappropriate in some circumstances" and exercising it in public is just a "choice." If it's a right that you care about, then it's a horrible crime against humanity if it is not respected. Sorry, but it doesn't work that way. "Women must cover their chests in public" is every bit as unacceptable as "women must cover their faces in public" or "women must walk ten paces behind their husbands in public." Bigotry is bigotry. And, while some folks are born straight, or gay, or black, or white, or whatever, everyone is born nude. So, clearly, if "being born that way" is the defining factor, then there should be nothing more acceptable than nudity. Right? No one who respects human rights will try and enforce ridiculous and nonsensical rules upon others.Please stop calling me a hypocrite when you choose to strike at me venomously. I have never said rights that I do not care about are better left destroyed.
If you personally believe that a women wearing a shirt in public is equal to oppressive regimes requiring burqas or remaining behind husbands then in my humble opinion you are an extremist. You are very innaproppriately including horrendous societies inducing rape and pillage into your cause of toplessness. This is wrong… in my humble opinion.
I would argue that someone one that respects human rights would NOT continue to force others to become cancerous and desparate for your entertainment.
I find it amusing that you've listed a whole slew of things that I don't actually use. I don't drink coffee. The sugar I use for my tea does not come in packets, because wasteful packaging is offensive to me - I have a reusable container that I refill at the store. I have a wood stove, so heating a kettle does not mandate the use of electricity. And, of course, reusable tea balls eliminate the need for tea bags. I don't drink beer. I brew my own mead using locally-sourced honey. I don't use a drop of gasoline, and can get biodiesel for my truck from a producer right here in town. I don't think I've ever used petroleum-based soap; that's a fairly disgusting idea.I imagine you did not read the paragraph in it’s entrirety. I appreciate your effort and applaud your lifestyle choices. You would not have to list them had you read the rest of the paragraph…
Do I need to say more of mathematics? You may respond that you do not use those things.
While this may be true it is irrelevant if all your neighbors are doing it. For everyone making a personal change, there are simply legions of others doing the opposite. We all will share the same fate however. That is my point of refocusing issues from toplessness to social responsibility.
Fraud/Force is initiated against numerous people every time someone makes a purchase at a store, fills their tank or turns on their electricity.
I’m not saying you have to force people to stop being swine. I’m advocating education. WE WILL ALL SHARE THE SAME FATE.
Interesting. Since I see Europe as a cesspool of totalitarianism. Putting a velvet glove over a fascist dictatorship doesn't make it any nicer, unless one is so shallow that one never looks beyond the glove.I stand by my beliefs on the States citizens. I do not remember advocating traditionally oppressive European regimes however. The only human government that aligns closest with my government model is Luang Prabang. Thank you for allowing me to share in your distaste for fascists. Although I will not loathe fascists so much after the TITS party is formed.
It means that the government should get out of the way of progress, so that cleaner, less-polluting technology can be developed, and effective treatments for cancer can be found. Governments are, by far, the worst polluters, and actively work to prevent new technology from being developed which might improve efficiency and reduce pollution.Government should never be involved in progress, I agree.
I strongly caution and actually warn that it is unsound and dangerous to blame the government for the problems you lay out in that paragraph though. Through either ignorance or misinformation you have come to a factually incorrect conclusion.
It is easy to understand how you have come to this as the lines are blurred and confusing. The truth is that private companies have been the preventers of progress. Unless that company is on top of technology then any new components would make it irrelevant. Private companies use government to make laws beneficial to themselves. They are one of the same. To eliminate government would invite the largest scumbags of wealth to impoverish us all. This is backed by 15,000+ years of historical record.
What is your solution? Rail barons or government lobbyists? Can you make a distinction between the two?
Those prices are high due to taxes. Eliminate the taxes, and they go right back down. If some guy beats you to a bloody pulp once a week, and does not do the same to me, that doesn't mean that I have a special privilege; that means he is an evil jerk.Your theory is interesting. You leave out an important part. I rewrite here.
If some guy beats me to a bloody pulp once a week PLUS steals everything I own, rapes my family and gives me cancer while NOT doing that to you BUT it is you that are benefiting from the goods stolen from me and you are watching the rape video of my family then YES, YOU are enjoying special privilege and gain TRUE bad karma. This karma is not decided by the few select persons with administrative rights. You have to accept that you empower that evil jerk and gather some of his energy in your blood goods.
Why am I receiving negative Karma from this website again?
So, your suggestion is that Americans should stop buying the things that are manufactured in the third world, where the workers struggle to survive? You do realize that automatically requires those who were formerly struggling to, instead, starve to death, right? Starving to death is preferable to struggling, but surviving?Workers struggle in the third world because they are kidnapped and forced to work in hazardous areas instead of the beautiful regions their ancestors had lived and relished for centuries. These people did not starve in the 10,000 years before industrial exploitation. There is no basis they would all starve to death if we shut down a factory employing 600 when it pollutes and murders slowly 500,000. The world has existed in quite relative harmony outside white European affairs. Starvation was minimal, yet natural when regarding bust and boom cycles. European intervention brought us the horrors of the atlantic slave trade to grow sugar. Sugar is taken for granted when its history in blood is unknown to most of the general public.
Norte Americanos NEED to understand that all their benefits of the easy street lives they live are only possible with genocide and pillage both committed in the past building the capital for capitalism and those being committed now. To throw away wrapping paper is one of the more despicable aspects of this.
The reason for the police state is to preserve commerce of goods that distract people from truths. Thereby it is stupid to rage against a machine that you help sustain power.
Every generation argues that the weather is "weirder" than it was when they were younger. It's not. That's just selection bias. As the saying goes, "the good old days weren't always good, and tomorrow ain't as bad as it seems." There's a famous passage in which Plato quotes Socrates, complaining about how children are disrespectful of their elders, lazy, don't pay attention in school, etc. These sort of biased views are nothing new; they've been going on for millennia. When you pick and choose which data to examine, you can prove anything. "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics." The weather is no "weirder" than it was ten, twenty, fifty, or a hundred years ago. Twenty years from now, my kids will listen to folks their age complaining about how weird the weather has become. Twenty years from then, my grandkids will do the same.Interestingly enough everything has gone haywire from recorded history weather patterns. Maybe it's normal. The drought will still devastate you. These patterns of strangeness are in my humble opinion a result of our insane cannibalistic mathematics of consumption. Pollution is rampant. There are islands of plastic in the middle of the atlantic and pacific. As they melt under the sun they form a liquified gel that covers the ocean, killing everything underneath. This is not to be dismissed as unimportant.
There is hyper-education now. Children read in 2nd grade what 40 year olds read in 9th. Youtube and the internet has changed everything. Kids are different and they are being taught Jersey Shore and XBOX. Artificial existence.
I really would like to contact and work with people on community based agriculture and sustainability. Spreading the knowledge of knowing where the things you use and their social impact is most important and being swept away in exchange for ignorance.
I do not want to fight with you MaineShark nor anyone else. I am interested in fruitful development of ideas. Is anyone else interested?
I hope I don't keep losing karma.
Topic: Introduction (Read 753 times)
