Post Archive

Region: Libertatem

History

The Amarican Empire wrote:So what would you guys think about a Paul Party?

Because why not create the same exact political party over and over again.

Alchandria wrote:Because why not create the same exact political party over and over again.

.....We do have 3 parties about almost the exact same thing.

Alchandria wrote:It has nothing to do with votes. You can all hate my personality as much as you please, because I recognize that it is rather unpleasant, I would just like to throw out there that what matters is political ideologies, and his is exactly what you are all against.

I'm against RLP majority.

The Time Alliance wrote:.....We do have 3 parties about almost the exact same thing.

I'm against RLP majority.

Don't worry, we're against your face. *snickers*

Humpheria wrote:Don't worry, we're against your face. *snickers*

Hi buddy

*Waves*

*lays on couch*

So, today in China, a young woman was put in jail for murder after killing her rapist. Opinions?

Post self-deleted by The Time Alliance.

Hallo Island wrote:So, today in China, a young woman was put in jail for murder after killing her rapist. Opinions?

3 words.

Stand Your Ground

Post self-deleted by The Amarican Empire.

Well, some more details. He beat her daughter also, but she chopped off his penis and then beat him to death with a hammer. I fully support her.

I'm rather interested in a true Objectivist party here in Libertatem. Not one bogged up with the tag on of Libertarian in the party title. No. Just a straight up Objectivist Party supporting you're individual rights as a human being and small to even no government. Who all here besides the obvious nations are Objectivists? I'm curious.

Hallo Island wrote:Well, some more details. He beat her daughter also, but she chopped off his penis and then beat him to death with a hammer. I fully support her.

Castration was enough.

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:I'm rather interested in a true Objectivist party here in Libertatem. Not one bogged up with the tag on of Libertarian in the party title. No. Just a straight up Objectivist Party supporting you're individual rights as a human being and small to even no government. Who all here besides the obvious nations are Objectivists? I'm curious.

I am okay with Objectivists, but I think that the ideology is flawed, similarly as I think that anarchism is flawed.

The Time Alliance wrote:Castration was enough.

No. I want to go back to the old days where rapists were tied by there torso to a wall and their penis was partially cut, but still attached so they were in immense pain, ad bled out in a few hours.

Humpheria wrote:No. I want to go back to the old days where rapists were tied by there torso to a wall and their penis was partially cut, but still attached so they were in immense pain, ad bled out in a few hours.

Nope. No.

This is why we have government and not civilian rule. So insane brutal unneeded things like this don't happen.

Humpheria wrote:No. I want to go back to the old days where rapists were tied by there torso to a wall and their penis was partially cut, but still attached so they were in immense pain, ad bled out in a few hours.

This is the way it should be. Where people are given just punishment for something they do. Lethal injection is simply getting off to easy and I hate it.

The Time Alliance wrote:Nope. No.

This is why we have government and not civilian rule. So insane brutal unneeded things like this don't happen.

It teaches a lesson. You rape someone these days you get out on good behavior and do it again. If you saw that happen in front of everyone, would you think twice about raping someone?

Humpheria wrote:It teaches a lesson. You rape someone these days you get out on good behavior and do it again. If you saw that happen in front of everyone, would you think twice about raping someone?

If I saw that. I'd want to kill those responsible for hurting the rapists.

Put him in jail don't torture him.

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:This is the way it should be. Where people are given just punishment for something they do. Lethal injection is simply getting off to easy and I hate it.

No Death Penalty.

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:This is the way it should be. Where people are given just punishment for something they do. Lethal injection is simply getting off to easy and I hate it.

I really enjoyed the punishment for arson in medieval times. You would first be beaten in the town square. You would then watch as your house is torched and all of your belongings are destroyed. And then small incisions are made on places that don't bleed too much. You are tied on a crucifix, and you bleed out in about a week. It was a serious offense back then because of farming, and crops and everything.

The Time Alliance wrote:Nope. No.

This is why we have government and not civilian rule. So insane brutal unneeded things like this don't happen.

No. People like you is why we don't need so much government. It is just punishment. If you murder somebody, you really don't deserve to live and should be tortured. You f'd up. That sucks. Think twice before you RAPE or MURDER people, the most heinous of crimes.

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:No. People like you is why we don't need so much government. It is just punishment. If you murder somebody, you really don't deserve to live and should be tortured. You f'd up. That sucks. Think twice before you RAPE or MURDER people, the most heinous of crimes.

Put them in jail.

Don't torture them. This isn't feudalism.

The Time Alliance wrote:No Death Penalty.

Prison is practically a free ride for people who commit heinous crimes,a nd then we pay so he gets free food, healthcare, hair cuts, lodging, and various luxuries. If we don't have the stomachs to slit their throats or hang em from a tower, the least we can do is lock him in a box with nothing except a piece of bread every three days and a bucket he can pee in. Just in case he gets thirsty, ya know.

The Time Alliance wrote:No Death Penalty.

How I imagine people like you:

"Oh he just raped and murder that innocent women. Let's let him live his life instead of giving him just punishment for doing that! That makes total sense!"

"Agreed man that makes so much sense! Let's let the murders live for murdering!"

"Exactly! You murder, your repercussions are nothing! You get to continue living! Sound Legit!"

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:No. People like you is why we don't need so much government. It is just punishment. If you murder somebody, you really don't deserve to live and should be tortured. You f'd up. That sucks. Think twice before you RAPE or MURDER people, the most heinous of crimes.

I agree if you harm another person you should face the punishment.

The Time Alliance wrote:Put them in jail.

Don't torture them. This isn't feudalism.

No it isn't it. It's bettering society. When you're gardening, you pull out the weeds because they kill the flowers.

Humpheria wrote:No it isn't it. It's bettering society. When you're gardening, you pull out the weeds because they kill the flowers.

Nice metaphor

You guys are sickening.

You don't kill people who kill people to show killing is wrong.

The Time Alliance wrote:No Death Penalty.

I am mixed on this

Why keep someone who is in jail for life or those that have committed treason alive? they are not worth the money to keep them in jail.

At the same time the government choosing who lives and who dies is not really a great thing.

The Time Alliance wrote:You guys are sickening.

You don't kill people who kill people to show killing is wrong.

Yeah... you do. Not to show killing is wrong, to discourage it. The world isn't kindergarten class, TTA. Would you, hypothetically, be more likely to kill someone now or if you knew you would be hung from a tower? If you had to kill someone. Not "Irrelevant, I wouldn't cause my momma said it was wrong"

The Amarican Empire wrote:I am mixed on this

Why keep someone who is in jail for life or those that have committed treason alive? they are not worth the money to keep them in jail.

At the same time the government choosing who lives and who dies is not really a great thing.

No they wanna let the citizens decide.

They want lynching and murder to prevent murder.

The Time Alliance wrote:You guys are sickening.

You don't kill people who kill people to show killing is wrong.

"Oh Hitler that wasn't very nice of you to do that to all those civilians and other soldiers. I guess we shouldn't come stop you by killing your army and saving those people because TTA says it's wewy bad to kill other people."-'Murica led by TTA

How does that sound? Because that is essentially what you're saying!

Humpheria wrote:Yeah... you do. Not to show killing is wrong, to discourage it. The world isn't kindergarten class, TTA. Would you, hypothetically, be more likely to kill someone now or if you knew you would be hung from a tower? If you had to kill someone. Not "Irrelevant, I wouldn't cause my momma said it was wrong"

Murder is against my religion. I wouldn't kill unless it is to defend myself from an attacker.

The Amarican Empire wrote:I am mixed on this

Why keep someone who is in jail for life or those that have committed treason alive? they are not worth the money to keep them in jail.

At the same time the government choosing who lives and who dies is not really a great thing.

The government isn't deciding, they decided when they pulled the trigger.

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:"Oh Hitler that wasn't very nice of you to do that to all those civilians and other soldiers. I guess we shouldn't come stop you by killing your army and saving those people because TTA says it's wewy bad to kill other people."-'Murica led by TTA

How does that sound? Because that is essentially what you're saying!

Russia would've beat Germany without us. America wasn't needed. Let Russia have Europe

The Time Alliance wrote:Murder is against my religion. I wouldn't kill unless it is to defend myself from an attacker.

Don't dodge the question because you know you are on the weak side. Disregarding anything else. In which society would you rather murder someone in cold blood?

Humpheria wrote:Don't dodge the question because you know you are on the weak side. Disregarding anything else. In which society would you rather murder someone in cold blood?

I'm not going to hypothetically choose between things i would never do.

Humpheria wrote:Don't dodge the question because you know you are on the weak side. Disregarding anything else. In which society would you rather murder someone in cold blood?

And what are you asking here?

I support Alchandria y'all

Also, punishment should be proportionate

The Time Alliance wrote:Russia would've beat Germany without us. America wasn't needed. Let Russia have Europe

Do not dodge my point here. Killing killers isn't wrong. It's human nature, you also forget we are animals. Animals kill.

This is debatable. Germany probably would eventually defeat the Royal Airforce and take the UK so they would be able to focus on 1 front versus the USSR. The only reason Germany looses their wars is because of geography. If Germany and Russia switched places WWI and WWII would have been way different, not just in terms of geography(obviously) but probably in terms of the victors also.

The Time Alliance wrote:I'm not going to hypothetically choose between things i would never do.

Because you know what the implications are. You know that if you had to choose you would rather do it where you get a slap on the wrist rather than a knife to the throat. It's common sense. It saves money, murder rate goes down, general crime rate goes down, biblical laws are followed (Eye for an eye - in Mormonism too, TTA), and on top of it all, the world has less murders and rapists.

The Time Alliance wrote:And what are you asking here?

If you had to kill someone, not dodge questions, would you rather do it here or places where you would be killed for it?

An eye for an eye TTA that's what we need to become a better society. one that doesn't rape and murder each other.

not to mention that we went to war because of Japan. if Japan did not attack the us they could have attacked the ussr

An eye for an eye means little to a blind man

Appears Humph and I are really crushing you right now. Go ahead take a second to catch your breath TTA.

Muh Roads wrote:An eye for an eye means little to a blind man

Quote of the day^^^

I reference Michael Jackson's doctor. He murdered MJ. Got convicted. Went to jail. Private suit, tv, plush memory foam bed, internet access, liquor cabinet (filled with taxpayer money), and access to gym which included a pool. He had a better jail life than I do as a good Christian man. Real punishing.

Humpheria wrote:Because you know what the implications are. You know that if you had to choose you would rather do it where you get a slap on the wrist rather than a knife to the throat. It's common sense. It saves money, murder rate goes down, general crime rate goes down, biblical laws are followed (Eye for an eye - in Mormonism too, TTA), and on top of it all, the world has less murders and rapists.

We don't believe in eye- for an eye. We disagree with death penalties and torture.

Humpheria wrote:If you had to kill someone, not dodge questions, would you rather do it here or places where you would be killed for it?

No where..... Unless I was attacked first. If anyone comes after me..... Anarchy will be first on my mind.

Muh Roads wrote:An eye for an eye means little to a blind man

It won't stop evil.

Humpheria wrote:I reference Michael Jackson's doctor. He murdered MJ. Got convicted. Went to jail. Private suit, tv, plush memory foam bed, internet access, liquor cabinet (filled with taxpayer money), and access to gym which included a pool. He had a better jail life than I do as a good Christian man. Real punishing.

That's just your tax dollars at work. Making sure criminals have a "nice stay" while there are real people that actually need the money like the disabled.

That's great. You murder someone and get treated like a King. Just great.

it kind of encourages crime.

The Amarican Empire wrote:it kind of encourages crime.

A little bit! It's ridiculous.

Post self-deleted by Republic Of Minerva.

Let's be real here, prison is a terrible place for most people (especially poor minorities) and men are raped daily. It's only the rich who can buy comfort in the political system.

The Time Alliance wrote:We don't believe in eye- for an eye. We disagree with death penalties and torture.

Book of Mormon

3 Nephi 12

Number 38:

"38 And behold, it is written, an aeye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth;"

The Mormon Church believes in an eye for an eye. Even if you don't.

The Lone Star wrote:Let's be real here, prison is a terrible place for most people (especially poor minorities) and men are raped daily. It's only the rich who can buy comfort in the political system.

And not every crime should be punished with the death penalty. Just capital offenses.

Einsiev wrote:A little bit! It's ridiculous.

with how criminals are treated in jail I don't see why the poor would not want to commit crime

I'll be the one to say it, the collective does not have the right to deprive the individual of life liberty or property period.

Humpheria wrote:Book of Mormon

3 Nephi 12

Number 38:

"38 And behold, it is written, an aeye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth;"

The Mormon Church believes in an eye for an eye. Even if you don't.

Read the verse right after that.

The Amarican Empire wrote:with how criminals are treated in jail I don't see why the poor would not want to commit crime

Hold it, the poor (especially poor people of color) have a terrible time in prison. They're usually put in there for minor offenses for long periods of time and never see a trial (I suspect State racism).

The Time Alliance wrote:Read the verse right after that.

Verse 39

39 But I say unto you, that ye shall not resist evil, but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also;

The Time Alliance wrote:Read the verse right after that.

Number 39:

" 39 But I say unto you, that ye shall not aresist evil, but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right bcheek, cturn to him the other also;"

I am aware, but that doesn't detract that you do, in fact, believe in eye for an eye. It is in your holy book.

The Amarican Empire wrote:with how criminals are treated in jail I don't see why the poor would not want to commit crime

Most of the poor actually look for jobs but others just steal. They don't want to put forth any effort to get a job.

The Lone Star wrote:Hold it, the poor (especially poor people of color) have a terrible time in prison. They're usually put in there for minor offenses for long periods of time and never see a trial (I suspect State racism).

That is an equally important issue. I think prisons should be privatized so they are 1. nicer and 2. cheap labor (but regulated, not work camps.)

Humpheria wrote:That is an equally important issue. I think prisons should be privatized so they are 1. nicer and 2. cheap labor (but regulated, not work camps.)

If criminals were treated nicely, that would break down the prison system.

I believe that passage in the Book of Mormon is saying that justice on earth consists of an eye for an eye (property justice and equal compensation), but that those who follow Christ forgive men for their transgressions just as He did when they nailed Him to the cross. Right or wrong?

The Lone Star wrote:I believe that passage in the Book of Mormon is saying that justice on earth consists of an eye for an eye (property justice and equal compensation), but that those who follow Christ forgive men for their transgressions just as He did when they nailed Him to the cross. Right or wrong?

Right. However that is a contradiction, and in this society capital punishment would be more beneficial to deal with capital offense.

Humpheria wrote:Number 39:

" 39 But I say unto you, that ye shall not aresist evil, but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right bcheek, cturn to him the other also;"

I am aware, but that doesn't detract that you do, in fact, believe in eye for an eye. It is in your holy book.

It didn't say that. It said it was written but we are instead to turn the other cheek.

And behold, it is written, an aeye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth But I say unto you, that ye shall not resist evil, but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also;

I would again like to voice my support for Alchandria

Humpheria wrote:That is an equally important issue. I think prisons should be privatized so they are 1. nicer and 2. cheap labor (but regulated, not work camps.)

Whoa, Whoa, Whoa, lets take a step back. As is well known, I don't believe the state has any proper job period, but in the current societal climate prisons are one of the things that should not even be talked about privatizing. Think about this, we already know crony capitalism rules washington. So now the corporations that play a major part in creating legislation now have an incentive to have people locked up, and for long times. Ideally a free society would function without prisons, but our system is not designed for that, nor privatization of the already existing apparatus.

Post self-deleted by The Amarican Empire.

The Time Alliance wrote:Verse 39

39 But I say unto you, that ye shall not resist evil, but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also;

OMG you're a mormon?! HAHA. Oh man that's good stuff right there. I don;t mean to be intolerant but this explains why your views are so skewed.

The Time Alliance wrote:It didn't say that. It said it was written but we are instead to turn the other cheek.

This is true. But can't really be used as a precedent here. I believe in turning the other cheek, but not on something as heinous as murder.

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:OMG you're a mormon?! HAHA. Oh man that's good stuff right there. I don;t mean to be intolerant but this explains why your views are so skewed.

SCREW YOU. This is you insulting me again because our beliefs don't line up.

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:OMG you're a mormon?! HAHA. Oh man that's good stuff right there. I don;t mean to be intolerant but this explains why your views are so skewed.

Whoa, man. Too far.

There is nothing wrong with a Mormon. I know another Mormon who is a very kind and generous person.

Post self-deleted by The Time Alliance.

Mitt Romney is Mormon and he is the opposite of times views.

Humpheria wrote:This is true. But can't really be used as a precedent here. I believe in turning the other cheek, but not on something as heinous as murder.

If we are going to bring up religious texts to tack on to some one, I would like to remind everyone the Christ was brutally murdered at the hands of the Romans and asked forgiveness for their sake. Theoretically any of his followers should advocate turning the other cheek regardless of the crimes committed against them.

The Time Alliance wrote:SCREW YOU. This is you insulting me again because our beliefs don't line up.

Sorry, TTA. Tried to have a civil debate, but we again reverted to religious intolerance.

Humpheria wrote:Sorry, TTA. Tried to have a civil debate, but we again reverted to religious intolerance.

of course it did.

The Amarican Empire wrote:Mitt Romney is Mormon and he is the opposite of times views.

I disliked him. I don't vote based on the fact we are of the same religion. I disagreed with him Economically and Internationally.

Lack There Of wrote:If we are going to bring up religious texts to tack on to some one, I would like to remind everyone the Christ was brutally murdered at the hands of the Romans and asked forgiveness for their sake. Theoretically any of his followers should advocate turning the other cheek regardless of the crimes committed against them.

Again, I believe in turning the other cheek, so said our Lord. But, on a personal, societal, and economic point of view. I can appropriate murders walking away without just punishment.

Lack There Of wrote:If we are going to bring up religious texts to tack on to some one, I would like to remind everyone the Christ was brutally murdered at the hands of the Romans and asked forgiveness for their sake. Theoretically any of his followers should advocate turning the other cheek regardless of the crimes committed against them.

the Romans carried it out but it was the Jews who told them to do it to Jesus.

Humpheria wrote:Again, I believe in turning the other cheek, so said our Lord. But, on a personal, societal, and economic point of view. I can appropriate murders walking away without just punishment.

I agree with this.

Lack There Of wrote:If we are going to bring up religious texts to tack on to some one, I would like to remind everyone the Christ was brutally murdered at the hands of the Romans and asked forgiveness for their sake. Theoretically any of his followers should advocate turning the other cheek regardless of the crimes committed against them.

Indeed. So all Christians supporting Death Penalty are hypocrites.

I'm Jewish but I support the death penalty.

it depends on the crime. Jesus did not commit any wrong.

The Time Alliance wrote:SCREW YOU. This is you insulting me again because our beliefs don't line up.

No I'm insulting you because apparently a guy talked to god and jesus in a forrest and had an epiphany. He then started a religion base don americanism where the garden of Eden is in Missouri and Jesus preached in the Americas.

The Time Alliance wrote:Indeed. So all Christians supporting Death Penalty are hypocrites.

Nope. Not hypocrites. They just don't base every single one of their opinions and views on a religion. They are able to worship their Lord AND think for themselves, a rare quality.

The Amarican Empire wrote:it depends on the crime. Jesus did not commit any wrong.

he was convicted (or the historical equivalent) and that's all it takes for the state to take anything and everything from you

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:No I'm insulting you because apparently a guy talked to god and jesus in a forrest and had an epiphany. He then started a religion base don americanism where the garden of Eden is in Missouri and Jesus preached in the Americas.

Again. Too far.

Stop insulting his religion. Every time religion is brought up, this happens.

Ronald Reagan And Rick Grimes wrote:No I'm insulting you because apparently a guy talked to god and jesus in a forrest and had an epiphany. He then started a religion base don americanism where the garden of Eden is in Missouri and Jesus preached in the Americas.

And you believe a random explosion started everything.

I'm honestly hoping you shut up.

Humpheria wrote:Again. Too far.

I'm sorry, is expressing facts now politically incorrect?

Is it impossible for this region to have an intelligent, open debate without resorting to insulting each other? Mainly in the field of religion? I thought I could have an intelligent conversation here, but apparently not.

The Lone Star wrote:I'm sorry, is expressing facts now politically incorrect?

Well these are facts however he said them in a mocking manner...

But in response guys. I got this. He can say what he wants no matter how much I wish he'd shut up.

Assembled with Dot's Region Saver.
Written by Refuge Isle.