RCali

Saying someone is a genius and endorsing the person is quite different. You can certainly recognize someone has having very high inteligence, and not at all imitate their daily lives, or support what they work on. Just like in formula 1 racing. Say you know an engineer who works for BMW, and you're an engineer for Ferrari. You know that other guy is a complete genius, and has created something so amazing, that it will make competition incredibly difficult. Are you going to give up on your work, or leave your own team and join his, because of this? Not necessarily. What I can tell you of how Trump isn't about small government is this: he wants to increase military power. That, for someone who knows just how much the US spends on military already, surely sounds absurd. They spend more than like the following 5 countries on military expense combined. Is it for small government creating a stronger armed forces? Don't think so. I don't follow politics, so I don't know what else he'd have done, but that's quite enough for me to know.

How many shows have you watched? I don't think Stefan ever said Trump is about small government, quite the opposite. If you had listened to enough shows, you'd know he's not supportive of Trump, and why exactly he isn't, and, also, what he does like about him. He only likes of him that he cares not about political correctness.

Religious humans are less inteligent on average. Atheism 1-0 theism.

So it's about having bad fathers, and not about how the proposed ideas fail any test of logic? Even santa claus seemed more plausible to me, when I was a child, than the existance of a god. Never believed in one. I did believe in the red clothed long beared fat man who climbed chimneys to deliver presents to everyone in the planet. Quite more believable than a all powerful god that was perfect in every way, that was never seen, heard, or gone through any observation in history, by credible sources. But hey, I guess I don't deserve any credit for thinking this when I was young, and it's just due to having had a bad father.

I reject your argument, dsayers. You aren't a rapist by cheering on a rape happening in front of you, and you aren't initiating the use of force by standing idle by. Also, you aren't responsible for someone else's actions, if you advise on taking them. We've spoken of this before, and we had opposite roles, that previous time. I gave the example of a driving instructor teaching someone wrongly, and the student crashing his car. I said he had responsability for the student sucking. You rejected this idea. Now, somehow, the roles are reversed, and I don't understand why. How could you understand this logic, and then back down from it, substituting it with seemingly very flawed logic. I agree with the previous conversation we had. The teacher has no responsability for the actions of the student, just like the spectator has no responsability for the actions of the rapist, like the voter has no responsability for the actions of the government. Yes, the voter is promoting the continuation of the existance and growth of government by voting, and yes, he's not a very informed person by doing it. But that doesn't mean he is involved in the atrocities that same government he ellected (let's imagine his party won). He's not responsible for the theft, kidnap, murder the party commited, since he didn't commit that action. Furthermore, if you say someone speaking about a rape and incentivising it has responsability for that same action, you're condemning freedom of speach. Am I guilty of rape if I congratulate rape? Am I guilty of theft for congratulating the government taxing? Am I a murder if I constantly speak of how great war in Syria is? No. I didn't have any of the actions I was speaking of, and thus I have no responsability for them. I have responsability for what I said, not what happened following my words.

How is it initiating the use of force, if you haven't had any physical contact with someone, or their property?

Comfort is redundant in the quest and sharing of truth.

I always found it suspicious - the sun. Always watching for hours on end, then starts vanishing without saying a word. It plots, I tell you.

This is fantastic. Thank you so much for sharing.

Investing? Creating or being part of a business? There's always a way.

Do you have enough people in your life that would donate to your family, so you could leave the government rob sack behind?

Yes, you were a coward for not taking action. What you should have done, in my opinion, was to speak to him, as calmly as possible, about the effects of spanking. Generally, saying things too aggressively, such as using "child abuse" instead of "spanking", can have them become defensive. If you don't show any aggression, they may never activate their defenses, and actually listen to you. It's hard to remain calm in that situation, sure, but you need to try. You need to do something, at least, even if it's not perfect. Consider printing a panflet on the effects of child abuse, and peaceful parenting (there's been someone who made one recently here in the forums), go back there, and give it to him, as politely as possible. Remember: regret is important to feel, so you do not commit the errors of the past. Just don't let it dominate your mind.

Thank you, everyone, for your suggestions. I've read two of the books, and I've ordered "Small Time Operator". It would be wonderful if I'd get more advice. Preferably, for free. I cannot afford buying more than the book I've ordered, for now, and I'm oh-so-hungry for knowledge and action

I'm so sorry for your story, and especially your wife. Hope everything is going well for you all. Is your monetary condition good or sustainable?

"Water conscious". Better not use too much, or there'll be none left in the planet!

If a game has certain rules, they are to be followed, if you are to say you are participating in said game. If you don't follow the rules it's no longer the described game, and it is something else. If you say you're participating in the game, but are not following the rules, you're lying. It's like if a swordsman used a pistol in a duel where it is clearly against the rules to do such a thing. Maybe he killed the other person, but he didn't so because he was part of the duel. It's because he knew the other person was considering the rules of the duel, and he wouldn't do this thing he did do, using the pistol. It's wrong to say this swordsman won the duel. He didn't participate in it, even if he said he did. It's hypocrisy.

Good luck on the path of improvement. Know that you're a part of the community, and it looks after itself.

Cheating cannot be called a game strategy, because it's playing outside the game. So government is acknowledgement of morality and choosing to not abide by it.

I've not identified a flaw? I've been saying it for a while now, and all I'm getting in return is saying I haven't actually said something, and getting a reputation minus. That's kind of insulting. I didn't disagree on having responsability to do the best for the child as parents, and I didn't disagree that identifying threats is important. Still doesn't prove that sharing religion is immoral.

It's not coercive to lie. And it's not coercive to be wrong, and share these wrong ideas. It may be to the detriment of someone else, to live by these ideas, but you cannot use force to defend from this, as someone is trying to feed you these ideas, or if they're trying to feed to someone else. All you can do is share your own ideas, and that's not using force. From wiktionary, force: Power exerted against will or consent; compulsory power; violence; coercion. So, once more, I reject your idea that sharing religion is immoral. This would go against free speech, and you would make free speech immoral, which doesn't add up, if you do the UPB test. You can lie freely, you can hate everyone verbally freely, you can incite violence, you can say whatever you want to whomever. You can universally lie. People may think you're an asshole for that, but it doesn't make your actions immoral. Just like honking a horn (I'm still boggled by how people were actually saying this is an act of violence).

I acknowledge what you've said, and assumed it was so basic, it didn't have to be mentioned. Of course I agree with that.

That's just not correct. You are saying that people who share what they take for granted, and as absolute truth are initiating the use of force. That's absurd. By that logic, you are initiating the use of force whenever you speak of anything, right or wrong, according to whatever may be. Whether it is the best for someone else is irrelevant. You are not initiating the use of force until you violate the right to property of the next person (as you so much like to say). You are violating no rights when speaking of religion and you are not violating rights when you lie, and you aren't violating rights when you say something as absurd as saying the planet is flat. Just like when you honk your horn, which people have been speaking of in some other thread. It's very weird that you're having trouble realizing this, seeing as you constantly bring up property rights. And, to make it clear, I did refer to owning the body as property.

Can you make the case that indocrinating is initiating the use of force? That would be very interesting. And, of course, if I referred to the state as a religion, that would be the winner by many millions or billions in death toll. And it has impressed me quite a bit how pretty much everyone in this thread is trying to deflect the attention from Islam to everything else. Maybe you do not understand, but, in Europe, the Islam invasion is a pretty big deal. I'm sure you've read the news, it is an act of war. And besides that, you know what they do when they arrive here. They kill, they rape, they steal. Europe's greatest danger isn't Christianism, it isn't Judaism. It is Islam and it is the state. The same in the Americas. The churches of the jews and christians may still have some power, but, compared to the actions of Islam, they are irrelavant. If you don't know this, then you're very behind in knowledge of the muslims. If I am behind, please show me why, or anyone, should worry about something else, and not on the genocidal, murdering, slaving, thieving, hysterical, civilization destroying rapists that are the muslims.

And what other religion or religious group today has such violent culture?

This. Only people who haven't read any part of the Quran don't know how important jihad is. I'll share this video I've also shared on another thread. Bill Warner works greatly on sharing his work on the study of Islam.