The Man With No Heart

[Howey]

Well see, that's different...because he's not one of "those" scumbag, dead beats...he was a recipient who used the system for it's true intent and even if he didn't...he's still not one of "them."

/end sarcasm/

I'd love to see someone challenge this statement:

Society has a right to restrict who gets help, period

.

[lil mike]

I'd love to see someone challenge this statement:
.

This statement?  "Society has a right to restrict who gets help, period"

Isn't that a truism?

[Howey]

This statement?  "Society has a right to restrict who gets help, period"

Isn't that a truism?

No. But I'm not surprised you're in agreement with the person who wrote it.

[lil mike]

No. But I'm not surprised you're in agreement with the person who wrote it.

So...you believe that society has no right to restrict who gets help, period.

[Howey]

So...you believe that society has no right to restrict who gets help, period.

What if one member of "society" felt someone deserved help and another didn't? Who would win?

Contrary to what you and the person who wrote that (who has always been of a "majority rules" mindset), society does not make laws.

[ekg]

I'd love to see someone challenge this statement:
.

"Society has a right to restrict who gets help, period"

as dickish as he is... unfortunately,  he's correct. Society does get to restrict who gets help...  we don't give food stamps to just anyone, they have to fall within a certain income level.. that is a restriction.

and that's just one  of a million others..

I know what you're thinking tho....it's more of an ideology or a "wouldn't it be nice if..."  utopian concept

but in the world we live in, yes... society does have that right.

that doesn't mean every single restriction is OK.. and frankly, caring about whether or not someone is high and getting food stamps to feed their kids isn't a real priority for me..but then, I'm not like ppl like him who want to dictate what goes on in everyone else's lives,bedrooms,doctor's office and recreational times..

[Howey]

as dickish as he is... unfortunately,  he's correct. Society does get to restrict who gets help...  we don't give food stamps to just anyone, they have to fall within a certain income level.. that is a restriction.

and that's just one  of a million others..

I know what you're thinking tho....it's more of an ideology or a "wouldn't it be nice if..."  utopian concept

but in the world we live in, yes... society does have that right.

that doesn't mean every single restriction is OK.. and frankly, caring about whether or not someone is high and getting food stamps to feed their kids isn't a real priority for me..but then, I'm not like ppl like him who want to dictate what goes on in everyone else's lives,bedrooms,doctor's office and recreational times..

Yes, he is a dick; and yes, he was saying a lot more than what he was saying...

I was wrong, however*, in my idealogic definition of "society":

so·ci·e·ty (s-s-t)
n. pl. so·ci·e·ties
1.
a. The totality of social relationships among humans.
b. A group of humans broadly distinguished from other groups by mutual interests, participation in characteristic relationships, shared institutions, and a common culture.
c. The institutions and culture of a distinct self-perpetuating group.

*See how easy that is, lilMike?

[lil mike]

What if one member of "society" felt someone deserved help and another didn't? Who would win?

Contrary to what you and the person who wrote that (who has always been of a "majority rules" mindset), society does not make laws.

I don't know who wrote that particular sentence, but it's not a new or original thought.  It's just been a fact.

"Society" may not make laws, but that has nothing to do really with your question.  I think the fact that you even find this point controversal shows just how much your ideology separates you from reality.  So argue the corollary.  If you don't believe that "society" has the right to restrict who gets help, who is help defined, does everyone have a right to get it, and if they do, can they just take it?

[Howey]

I don't know who wrote that particular sentence

Check elsewhere. I don't think he's ever had a new or original thought in his life. Like someone else, he merely parrots what he's heard on Fox.

"Society" may not make laws

Actually, that was exactly my point. But, as ekg pointed out, my views are idealogical as far as that's concerned.

[lil mike]

Check elsewhere. I don't think he's ever had a new or original thought in his life. Like someone else, he merely parrots what he's heard on Fox.

Actually, that was exactly my point. But, as ekg pointed out, my views are idealogical as far as that's concerned.

You're mixing webboards now?  Haven't you been warned about crossing the streams?

But go ahead, I realize it's an ideological argument, not really one based on the real world, but I would like to hear it anyway.

[Howey]

You're mixing webboards now?  Haven't you been warned about crossing the streams?

But go ahead, I realize it's an ideological argument, not really one based on the real world, but I would like to hear it anyway.

Didn't you feign ignorance as to the author even though you have been participating in the thread? I din't want to mention the name but I guess your feigned ignorance was meant to bust me out???

I guess I'll just carry on this discussion elsewhere. Feel free to run over there and let them know.

[lil mike]

Didn't you feign ignorance as to the author even though you have been participating in the thread? I din't want to mention the name but I guess your feigned ignorance was meant to bust me out???

I guess I'll just carry on this discussion elsewhere. Feel free to run over there and let them know.

I didn't recall the statement or the author.  I wouldn't have asked for the name if I had recalled seeing that on the other board. 

But no, why would I want to bust you out?  I want you there.

[uselesslegs]

I got Walking pneumonia...again (Jokes are to numerous, wheeeeee)...and I was able to take myself to the doc at the first sign of something not being right.  I mean, not right by my personal standards and head this off at the pass.  When it comes to things like this, I can't fuck around and wait until I see full blown symptoms. 

I'm overly aware of how my body (which can be a pain) works, but I've trained myself to do so so I don't get anywhere near deafcon 5 and I address something when my radar goes off.  I'm not a hypochondriac, just ungodly aware.  9 times out of 10, I'm correct in going to see the doctor...which luckily hasn't been a whole lot in the past several years.  I'm relatively healthy given my condition and glad of it.  But I gotta admit...it scares me to know that in the immediate or not to distant future access to my doc may be limited in any number of ways.

I waited one time in my life, until it looked and seemed appropriate to see a doctor...and it almost killed me.  I know this because the doctor, at the time, told me..."Son, I'm gonna be blunt...this is really bad and if there's people you want to see, call them in now.  You can't mess around with MD, why did you wait?"  It was a really good question and I didn't have an answer.  Never again, I told myself...and I was true to my word. 

But now, with vouchers looming and potential cut's to access...I keep thinking, "why might I be punished if I have a bad year or several years health wise...do I not rank as worthy because my level of societal productivity and worth doesn't match some heretofore un-talked about standard that makes me not worth saving?" 

Not a fan.