| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> > > > As for "first principles", I have become convinced that you do not even
> > > > understand what "freedom" really means. What tipped the balance was this post:
> > > > http://news.lugnet.com/off-topic/debate/?n=13204
> > >
> > > I'm totally comfortable with what I said there and see no contradiction.
> > > Feel free to explain how it shows that I don't understand what freedom
> > > means. Freedom does NOT mean letting those that violate your rights get away
> > > with it if you can help it.
> >
> > Your comfort is irrelvant. You said what happened on the 11th was an attack
> > on "freedom and liberty", I'm just asking you to justify that (if you can).
> > This text questions the premis that it was an attack on freedom and liberty:
> > http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4266289,00.html
> >
> > The author takes it apart. It is a long text, but well worth the read. Read
> > it, and then tell me what you mean by "freedom and liberty".
>
> Well can you justify your comments after reading the text I quote?
Come on Larry, I really am interested in what you think freedom & liberty
means, both within the context of the text I quoted and your fondness for
the thoughts of George Roberson.
Scott A
>
> Scott A
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
74 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
