Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FJB who wrote (374545)	7/23/2010 10:46:36 AM
From: Jorj X Mckie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 794016

Social Liberalism wants to take away your right to bear arms. It wants to control what you are able to watch on TV and hear on the radio. It wants to tell you what foods to eat. It wants to put a mosque in your neighborhood and have your Muslim neighbors practice Sharia law. I guess it all depends on where one puts the stake in the ground to define "social liberalism". I define social liberalism as any law that tries to take away my right to do whatever I want as long as I am not harming others, is bad. I have a right to defend myself and to take away my means of protecting myself is violating that right. I have the right to free speech and both parties at times want to control what we are able to watch on TV and hear on the radio, so both parties have wanted to violate this right. I have the right to stick whatever the hell I want into my body. Telling me what I can eat violates that right. Sharia law at its most fundamental level is about coercion. It thrives on depriving others of their rights. Because liberals have changed the definition of social liberalism doesn't mean that we have to accept their definitions.