Argh property rights debate

[tomdemaine]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ask them to give you their wallets and see what they think about personal property then. I'm serious. in fact don't even ask, just take their wallets. If they say anything about it then they believe in property no matter what fancy worded crap they spout.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seriously I told one of them that I need his car more than him and jokingly took his keys.

Its so [censored] ing funny because we are all going to be so [censored] ing rich beyond what we really deserve that it is pretty stupid for them to keep being dirty commies.

We are all going to make more in a 10 week summer period of free lunches and ego blowjobs than my girlfriend makes in a [censored] ing year busting her ass off working overtime. I point this out to them and LOL at the hypocracy

[/ QUOTE ]

Where is the hypocrisy? You don't have to believe that property is a natural right to want to own property. In making that assumption, you and tomd look like fools in this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have to believe that property exists though. If you say that property doesn't exist but get upset when someone takes something of yours well I don't know what to say you're just a moron.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a terrible arguement. You are essentially saying that: getting upset = right being violating. If you get upset about your favorite team losing a game, does that mean you have to believe a right has been violated?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's a necessary but not sufficient condition. If you don't believe in property and I steal your stuff how can you possibly logically be upset in any way? It's impossible. The analogy is that you say "I don't care about this team in fact I don't even watch this sport" then getting upset when that team loses.