Favorite team:LSU 
Location:Katy, TX
Biography:UNO Grad, LSU Fan
Interests:
Occupation:
Number of Posts:4614
Registered on:12/16/2008
Online Status:Not Online

Recent Posts

Message
Why couldn’t much of this just be an error in the DOB, like a flipped couple of digits or something?

Are they actually tracking all of those down and verifying the date/SS number is actually some kind of fraud vs just a mistake.

Asking honestly, I’m MAGA and 100% behind what DOGE is doing.
Hey, I like it. Trump giving the common man the same advantage as the sleezy insider politicians who do this all the time.

They should know the playbook better than anyone.
quote:

It attempts to exploit tariffs to subvert the existing international economic and trade order, put China's. interests above the common good of the international community, and advance China's hegemonic ambitions at the cost of the legitimate interests of all countries.
FIFY

re: Tranny wins girls track meet.

Posted by LSUnKaty on 4/6/25 at 9:17 am
No, that wasn’t a girl’s track meet.
quote:

Or… maybe it’s the obvious. somebody just screwed up
Hopefully Musk will get to the bottom of it either way and tell the American people.

I bookmarked this post just in case.
quote:

targeting details on upcoming air strikes
What evidence do we have that targeting details were contained in those texts?
quote:

By burning through his first two marriages and f-ing a porn star?
Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.
quote:

The government distributes rights in our society. In other places, a monarch may distribute those rights. Or a tribal leader.
While I disagree, I will stipulate for purposes of discussion that this is true.

It still does not explain where the idea or features of any particular right derived from or was conceived of. How does the government know what rights to distribute and what features those rights should embody?

Or for that matter, what the notion of a right is?

Are these derived simply from the authority of the State also, by whim and fiat? If so, it would seem any discussion about rights would be useless and futile since the very conception of such depends only on the State, or in your parlance the ruling authority of a given society, and therefor ever changing over space and time and not grounded in any abstract concept that can be discussed or debated.

This point of view transforms a Right into simply a license to particular behavior, a valid concept in itself, but the notion of rights has always been something different and more fundamental than the simple authority or "ability" to do something.

Again, where do the notions of what behaviors should be sanctions by the State come from? Do they just spring from random thoughts in people's heads, or are they based on something more fundamental and persistent than that?
If they can get a new bank account and necessitate a new direct deposit authorization then they should be able to use the online identity verification or get to a SSA office.
quote:

society is the aggregate of people living together in a more or less ordered community, per the dictionary.
Hmm... So just an aggregate of people living together?

Seems like your concept of it, at least as expressed in this thread anyway, encompasses a lot more than that simple notion. The power to confer rights for instance, how/why is a simple aggregation of people living together in a community capable of originating or creating "rights" out of thin air?
quote:

Absolutely. In certain cultures, honor killings exist which violates rights in Americans' eyes but not the eyes of those cultures.
Then those cultures would be wrong.


Based on my point of view, which is the only one that matters to me.

Am I doing that right?
quote:

Not sure why it's so difficult for people to separate the right from the recognition of the right and the enforcement of the right.
They can and do.

Everything else you said was spot on.
quote:

Right to life is dependent on society and the fear of punishment - if fear of punishment does not exist - your life can be extinguished at any time
That my life can be extinguished at any time is true enough, but that's true with or without any esoteric "fear of punishment" or "protection of the state", and it has no bearing on my own right to life. If my life is taken away by someone intentionally, and for no justifiable reason, then my right to life was violated, but that doesn't mean I never had that right.

But if I kill that someone, who was trying to kill me for no just reason, then I am not violating any right, I'm just protecting my own right to life. No society or state involved, just two people, but there is still a need to differentiate those two realities - outright cold blooded murder vs self-defense.

That's my narrative anyway and I'm sticking with it. You post-modern types can go off on your boondoggles but remember, based on your own ideology, my point of view is just as valid as yours is and part of that view is a resistance to allowing every new ideology that comes along to change the longstanding concepts and vocabulary that has been built up around and in support of my preferred narratives. Especially when such attempts at "change" are just a mechanism or ploy to gain power to yourself and bend old narratives to seemingly fit your perverse ways of thinking.
quote:

No one has any rights outside of a society.
How about the right to self defense? Which emanates directly from the right to life.

I don't think "society" (whatever you mean by that) is required for that.
quote:

Rights are socially constructed
Would you say that your right to life, to not be murdered in your sleep for no reason, is a social construct dependent on consensus?

I mean ceteris paribus of course, all else equal, not if you are a mass murderer or something.
quote:

How many of Obama’s deportations did he try to block?
This is what I'd like to know.
quote:

White wife/Black husband marriages show twice the divorce rate of White wife/White husband couples by the 10th year of marriage, whereas Black wife/White husband marriages are 44% less likely to end in divorce than White wife/White husband couples over the same period.
Now do White wife/Black husband marriages vs Black wife/Black husband marriages.
quote:

If you can’t enforce your beliefs on others until it becomes accepted then it’s worthless

quote:

People can’t be left ungoverned as libertarian individualists at scale because they are not smart enough to make rational choices

You post ideas like these and people are downvoting me?
quote:

that’s on the individual physician
That’s convenient.

When it’s discrimination in the workplace, is it on the individual manager or is it systemic privilege and discrimination that requires a full on anti-racist and equity movement?

When it’s police brutality is it on the individual officer or is it system racism that requires a reimagining of the way policing is done and funded in our entire country?

When it’s religious or racial discrimination is it on the individual bigot or is it a sign of a whole series of perverse “phobias” embedded in our society that require civil unrest and all manner of affirmative action to address?