Say Anything Blog

Lefties like to champion the “rights” of animals and the environment, mostly because they are unable to speak out against the leftards that presume to speak for them and take their business elsewhere!

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

Proof: It’s really about destroying our very successful society, by perverting the meaning of “rights”.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

PETA pockets are mid eastern.

Behold the pale horse.

All turn and bow before Saturnus!

Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

9/11 was a conspiracy that has roots in the ancient civilization of atlantis, the existence of which is being actively suppressed by multiple states, and involves the nazis, the bushes, AND enron. chimpanzees have rights to doublewide trailers and crack habits.

Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

When you have nothing to say, spew nonsense, Sparkie!

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

r108
just trying to reciprocate buddy! also, i like this post. it lays HG’s ‘etherial rights’ to waste. rock on.

Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

i like this post.

I’m sure you’re telling the truth. /sarcasm

Seriously, please give a reasoned argument against any of the things stated in the post, if you can.

I know it’s a bit plain and simple for you, but it seems to boil down to the proposition that you can’t have rights without responsibilities, and you can’t have power without responsibility.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

responsibility is vague in many ways. i would not base the ‘donation’ of rights by the govvy to its citizens, which is what it is vis a vis the ability to revoke it in the stead of responsibility. acc. to most, rights are somehow natural, whether part of the natural ‘existents’ or not. indeed many political philosophers must first reason why a government can justly exist, given some of these basic, natural rights on which it must perch.

Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

Sparkie: Despite your fondest wishes, responsibility is not vague at all.  It is accepting the consequences of your actions.  Your sophistry, on the other hand, is quite vague, as I’m sure you intended it to be.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

robert, you think spsrky is on something?  Could explain his muddled incoherent comment which made absolutely no sense except maybe to him.

You don’t have to be a moron to be a liberal Democrat but it sure helps.

DD: I have suspected that for quite some time, or maybe it’s the case that he isn’t on something that he should be on, if you know what I mean(antipsychotic meds).  In any case, he is serving his usual function of being a chew toy for the rest of us.  It is hard to take him seriously.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

r108
rights are ‘given’ to us by the government so that we may be protected. its the trade off they give us for us being included. we make them more powerful. its only that, we can’t reject the protection… so its circular. and maybe it has to with responsibility, but what if one wants the responsibility of protecting themself? it becomes problematic.

if we could strip rights from irresponsible people, lots of heads would roll.

Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

rights are ‘given’ to us by the government so that we may be protected.Not in this country.  Read our Constitution some time. its the trade off they give us for us being included. we make them more powerful. its only that, we can’t reject the protection… so its circular. Yours is the Marxist approach, just the opposite of how we do it in the US. and maybe it has to with esponsibility, but what if one wants the responsibility of protecting themself? it becomes problematic. It’s called the Second Amendment.  I suggest you read that one, as well.

if we could strip rights from irresponsible people, lots of heads would roll. Well said, my little totalitarian.

GIGO

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

How do you expect to be taken seriously when you have a thread like this?

Oh my God, PETA is a threat to national security.

unalienable Rights

unalienable Obligations?

Hawk/Woof: I know this goes right over your little partisan heads, but this is about lefties perverting the whole concept of “rights”.  In reality, the common people under socialist totalitarianism(Marxism) have no rights at all, least of all the right to have a diversity of opinion from Marxist ideology.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

This is classic, “The boy who cried Woof.”

OK ,
I’ll sign the loyalty oath.

When I started to read the post I laughed...who in their right mind would ascribe the desire of some to grant rights to animals to all leftists? But then I remembered reading a liberal blog where the recent NRA statement in support of terrorists’ right to buy guns was used to slam all conservatives.

I must conclude that neither right nor left enjoys a monopoly on wackiness. That being said, I personally support r108’s position that we all have responsibilities to live up to and that those are often lost in the clamouring to exercise one’s right to this or that. I’m sure that r108 and I don’t agree on what those responsibilities are but I’m pleased that we seem to agree on something after all.

"There are different kinds of truths for different kinds of people. There are truths appropriate for children; truths that are appropriate for students; truths that are appropriate for educated adults; and truths that are appropriate for highly educated adults, and the notion that there should be one set of truths available to everyone is a modern democratic fallacy. It doesn’t work.”

Irving Kristol

I’m sure that r108 and I don’t agree on what those responsibilities are but I’m pleased that we
seem to agree on something after all.

True that.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

The folks at PETA need their heads dislodged from their asses just as much as the original author of this post.

“It’s a burden we’re stuck with under the terms with which God gave us the planet.”

I guess the guy can’t go anywhere without using his religious dogma as some kind of moronic badge of honor. “God” did not “give” us the planet. We only happen to be the most successful species on the planet, currently. As a species we invade an area, despoil the resources in that area and move on. On the way we grow larger and more dangerous. Essentially we are an infections plague that’s due to self destruct any time at the rate we are going.

PETA advocates are equally as moronic. Interspecies relationships do not matter. Chimps do not need rights since they cannot communicate or interact with us on our terms as a species. For instance they can’t keep minimum wage jobs or learn calculus or drive a car (not that these are the only examples) so why would they need rights? End of story.

BTW: robert108, why are you attributing the accusations in this drivel to ALL of the “Left”? Try to look at the world in shades of gray rather than absolute BLACK and WHITE. It might save your life from that impending brain aneurysm or heart attack in store for you. Quit stressing out and shitting bricks over every crackpot’s blog post.

Christianity professes an obligation between God, man and animals

“YOU SHALL NOT MUZZLE THE OX WHILE HE IS THRESHING,

Woof: My first reaction to your comment was: “You can’t be serious!”, but then I realized that you are serious with that nonsense…

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Serious as scripture.
deuteronomy/25-4 and
1_timothy/5-18.

For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn. And, The laborer is worthy of his hire.

Dorothy: You certainly entitled to your own opinions.

Woof: Isn’t it just a bit hypocritical for you to be giving a lecture on the Bible?  Glad you went there for credibility, though.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

That should be: “You are certainly entitled to your own opinions.”

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Animals can have no rights because animals cannot undertake obligations.

Rights only apply to creatures that are capable of acknowledging a contract.

robert108 writes about:

that nonsense…

IE, the Bible.

Dave: As dishonest as ever, I see.  The nonsense was Woof cherry-picking the Bible. But then, you knew that…

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Since human fetuses and infants are incapable of acknowledging a contract…

You lie, as usual, Dave.  Human fetuses and infants are not incapable of acknowledging a contract, they just haven’t learned how to do it yet.  On the other hand, a chimp will never learn how to do that, no matter what.  You just keep pushing your infanticide rant.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

You certainly entitled to your own opinions.

That’s a good start. Keep it up.

Dorothy: Your ego is out of control.  Your opinions are your own, and have nothing whatsoever to do with me.  I certainly don’t agree with the ones you have expressed so far.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

On the way we grow larger and more dangerous. Essentially we are an infections plague that’s due to self destruct any time at the rate we are going.

A rather depressing view of the human race.  Wonder why you hste yourself so much.

You don’t have to be a moron to be a liberal Democrat but it sure helps.

On the other hand, a chimp will never learn how to do that [acknowledge a contract], no matter what.—Robert108

So you want to take rights away from some of the mentally disabled too Robert108?

“All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.”
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” —George Orwell

So you want to take rights away from some of the mentally disabled too

No, vegetarians and other leftists will still have their rights!

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

That’s pretty funny. Did a mentally disabled child help you come up with that?

“All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.”
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” —George Orwell

So you want to take rights away from some of the mentally disabled too Robert108?

This is just stupid.  In the first place, the article is about the leftie lies about “rights” in general; the chimp is peripheral, used to illustrate a principle.  Of course, since lefties are “principle-challenged”, I understand why that went over your head.
It is very clearly stated that animals and humans are different, in respect to rights.  You just made up the part about mentally disabled.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

On the way we grow larger and more dangerous. Essentially we are an infections plague that’s due to self destruct any time at the rate we are going.

Save the planet; kill yourself!

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Did a mentally disabled child help you come up with that?

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

r108:

Human fetuses and infants are not incapable of acknowledging a contract, they just haven’t learned how to do it yet.  On the other hand, a chimp will never learn how to do that, no matter what.

Dave, that depends on how serious the mental retardation is and whether it is correctable.  If you have a brain-dead fetus, few people will argue that it should be awarded the status of a living human.

Thus, mass murder of the retarded is permissible.

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

Thus, mass murder of the retarded is permissible.

Kinky.  I think you should act on your beliefs, Dave, instead of just blowing hot air.  Take responsibility for your philosophical conclusions, if you dare.
This thread isn’t about any of your fetid fantasies, Dave; it’s about the leftie perversion of the concept of “rights”.  Get it?

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

I think you should act on your beliefs, Dave, instead of just blowing hot air.

Show me how I’m wrong. Show me how the author’s conclusions don’t lead to the mentally retarded having no rights.

Dave, that depends on how serious the mental retardation is and whether it is correctable.

Show me how I’m wrong.

Sorry, Dave! Some of us already have full time jobs!

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

Super-serious--serious enough that
the person is incapable of acknowledging a contract--and it’s uncorrectable.

Dave: Your inability to do simple logic is always amusing.  Severely retarded people are not the ones insisting on their “rights”, and so their contract decisions are made through the agency of caretakers who are perfectly capable of doing so.  You are deeply sick and confused.  This isn’t about killing people; it’s about leftie lying about rights.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Severely retarded people are not the ones insisting on their “rights”,

Neither are chimps.

and so their contract decisions are made through the agency of caretakers who are perfectly capable of doing so.

This would be the case with chimps too. Some animal rights organization would assume agency over a chimp to protect it from being killed.
Do you agree that following the author’s conclusion means that mentally retarded human beings possess no rights by themselves? Cuz that’s pretty sick, man. And if you disagree, why?

Chimps aren’t people.  Did you miss that one, Dave?  You have always had a problem with making valid equivalences, and it continues to this day.
Human beings, in general, can take responsibility for their choices, whereas it’s merely reflexive with all other animals.  They cannot be responsible for their actions, so categorically, they cannot have rights.
Your cherry-picking to advance your baby-killing agenda is pathetic, and deserves no further attention from me.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Human beings, in general, can take responsibility for their choices,

As you put it: “They cannot be responsible for their actions, so categorically, they cannot have rights.”

You’re the one who linked to an author whose reasoning leads one to deny the retarded any rights. If you have a problem with that, take it up with him, not me.

As you put it: “They cannot be responsible for their actions, so categorically, they cannot have rights.” Nice cherry-pick; I was referring to chimps, as a category.

You’re the one who linked to an author whose reasoning Not his reasoning, Dave, your “infer the opposite” sickness. leads one to deny the retarded any rights. If you have a problem with that, take it up with him, not me. You are the one who is logically challenged, Dave.  His article said nothing of the kind.  You missed it, as usual, in your monomaniacal obsession with so-called “animal rights”.  They don’t exist.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Nice cherry-pick; I was referring to chimps, as a category.

His article said nothing of the kind.  You missed it, as usual, in your monomaniacal obsession with so-called “animal rights”.  They don’t exist.

Mentally retarded humans are also incapable of acknowledging a contract.

Can you put it all together here r108?

You need the quality “Q” to have rights. Group “A” lacks that quality, so they don’t have rights. Group “B” lacks that quality, so they too don’t have rights.

A= chimps. B= retarded humans.

I’ll just go step by step to highlight the exact spot where your reading comprehension fails. So when I say a statement that you think is illogical, just tell me the number. OK?

1) According to the author, “rights only apply to creatures that are capable of acknowledging a contract.”

2) Mentally retarded human beings are not capable of acknowledging a contract.

3) Following the author’s reasoning, mentally retarded human beings have no rights.

Dave: Do you understand the meaning of the word “categorical”?
It means “taken as a category”.  Humans fit into one category, chimps into another one.  I know you are confused, but this is ridiculous.  You have used your twisted imagination to create fantastical meanings for thing that have no bearing on reality.  That is an enduring quality of lefties, true, but you have it to an unusual degree.  Your premise is flawed.  GIGO

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

I’ll just go step by step to highlight the exact spot where your reading comprehension fails. So when I say a statement that you think is illogical, just tell me the number. OK?

1) According to the author, “rights only apply to creatures that are capable of acknowledging a contract.”

2) Mentally retarded human beings are not capable of acknowledging a contract.

3) Following the author’s reasoning, mentally retarded human beings have no rights.

Dave: You are also mixing broad generalities(humans, chimps) with specific examples(mentally retarded humans), so your conclusions are incorrect.  Retarded humans have rights because they are human, and as a category(look it up), humans qualify for rights.  Chimps, on the other hand, retarded or not, have no rights because their category of being does not possess the general ability to make contracts.  Even if one chimp somehow had that ability, it wouldn’t confer anything on all the rest of the chimps.  Get it?
Because you can’t do logic, you jump back and forth between particular and general in the same argument, thus invalidating any conclusions you may reach.  You just don’t get it.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

1) According to the author, “rights only apply to creatures that are capable of acknowledging a contract.”

2) Mentally retarded human beings are not capable of acknowledging a contract.

3) Following the author’s reasoning, mentally retarded human beings have no rights

I would clarify one word which should obviate the dilemma. Change “creatures” to “species”. I believe this would be in keeping with the author’s intent.

1) According to the author, “rights only apply to a species that is capable of acknowledging a contract.”

2) Mentally retarded human beings are not capable of acknowledging a contract, but are part of a species that is.
3) Following the author’s reasoning, mentally retarded human beings have rights

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

Proof: Good one.  It is also true that humans decide the entire “rights” issue, so it goes the way we say it goes, and no other species is in a position to do anything about it, even if they were aware of the issue at all, which they aren’t.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

I would clarify one word which should obviate the dilemma.

By “clarify” you mean “alter to suit my purposes.”

Why draw the line at species? If we go down to family, chimps and apes are included.

To continue the style of your cute amendments…

1) According to the author, “rights only apply to a family that is capable of acknowledging a contract.”

2) Cmips are not capable of acknowledging a contract, but are part of a family (hominids) that is.
3) Following the author’s reasoning, chimps have rights

Dave: It’s not the author’s reasoning, it’s your twisted inference.  The article is about leftie twisted reasoning about the entire issue of “rights”, and your blather so far is a perfect example of that flawed reasoning.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

BTW, “clarification” only works for those who are capable of being clear.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

By “clarify” you mean “alter to suit my purposes.”

No, I mean “clarify”, oh, Obfuscating One! Make clear what the author’s intentions were, not your anal retentive misunderstanding and narrow definition of what fits your demented purposes.
Grow up, Dave. Consider joining the human race. Or at least that portion of it that lives in the real world.

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

Make clear what the author’s intentions were

Rights only apply to creatures that are capable of acknowledging a contract.

actually meant:

Rights only apply to creatures that are capable of acknowledging a contract. However, if you are incapable of acknowledging a contract, but are in the same Domain, Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, AND Species as a creature who is capable of acknowledging a contract, thus, by the transitive power of acknowledgement, rights apply to you too. It’s important to note that your similarities with this other creature must extend all the way down to species; if it stops at Family, you have no rights.  Again, my apologies for not specifiying; I assumed that by writing: Rights only apply to creatures that are capable of acknowledging a contract people would know I was just kidding and reinterpret it in an entirely different and completely illogical way.

Dave: Did you study to become this big of an asshole, or does it come naturally?

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

You must be very close friends with this person, if you knew that:

Me? You’re the one who takes everything he says, twists it, takes it to an absurdity and then (comically) states that he logically takes away the rights of the mentally retarded (hereafter, referred to as: Dave)

Better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it.

When he writes:

Rights only apply to creatures that are capable of acknowledging a contract.

Rights only apply to creatures that are capable of acknowledging a contract.

The faulty assumption is yours, Dave.  You confuse the general(creatures) with the specific(mentally challenged human creatures).  It’s a common leftie failing.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Dave: In the first place, follow the link and email the author of the piece or comment on that thread at tammyblog.  I’m sure he will inform you of the reality of what he wrote and why he wrote it.  I guess you think it makes you “special” to be the only one who makes your interpretation and distortion of this fairly straightforward piece, and it does, in the sense of “special ed”.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.

Fucken nice job Dave. If Robert108 were a little smarter, he’d realise he’s wrong. And if Robert108 wasn’t advocating exterminating the mentally disabled, I’d just about feel sorry for him. 

“All the war-propaganda, all the screaming and lies and hatred, comes invariably from people who are not fighting.”
“Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac.” —George Orwell

Dave and AV: Birds of a feather.

"Give the lefties a pile of money, and they’ll spend it buying votes.” - Rush Limbaugh on the “bailout”.