Thanks for the rep. Yup, I can't believe someone could miss the mark so much. All those places he was complaining about the gun laws, have better crime statistics. Yet he can't see it.
I was going to say something. Can't remember what. The picture to the left seems mesmerizing. I can't seem to take my eyes off of it. Oh. Yeah. I remember. Thanks for the rep.
I'm not sure either. But I think some serious holes were poked into his non-aggression-be-all-end-all theory. You did a much better job than I could. I think the JC ethic IS the epitome of non-aggression. The difference is the why. To your point, when the why is based on the whims of people, non-aggression today is an infringement of somebody's rights tomorrow.
Thanks for the rep! Answering no may be the best answer. And to those who object on the grounds that we should not lye, there is strong moral basis for answering no in cases such as these.
I quoted the bump in the OP. I think the ability to edit posts expires at some point. Let me know if that is not the way you want to handle it. Another option is to simply close that one and start a new ad.
Yeah, like some others who've been and gone, not amenable to reason, blathers lib/prog talking points. I have to drop out at times before I start getting really nasty.
Thanks for the rep. He's one of about 4-5 dependably countervailing voices. It seems like in almost anything that is discussed, there's a certain number that seem to relish in disagreement for the sake of disagreement.