Active Users:679 Time:26/12/2025 01:51:53 AM
government as a social contract is an opinion. LadyLorraine Send a noteboard - 15/11/2010 07:47:57 PM
If you believe there is no such contract, you'd certainly find that subversion to be heinous treason. So you are still finding what is treason and what is not to be based on what you support.

PS. I'm not going to argue with you whether a social contract or not is "right", that is not my point and you shall not derail the conversation :P
Still Empress of the Poofy Purple Pillow Pile Palace!!
Continued Love of my Aussie <3
This message last edited by LadyLorraine on 15/11/2010 at 07:53:27 PM
Reply to message
Subversive Websites - 13/11/2010 10:49:15 PM 1347 Views
"Intended or serving to subvert, especially intended to overthrow or undermine an established govt". - 14/11/2010 01:44:14 AM 732 Views
Re: Gee, thanks dad! *NM* - 14/11/2010 01:32:32 PM 501 Views
Well, I'm hoping I simply disagree with your diction rather than your motives. - 14/11/2010 03:36:57 PM 797 Views
Re: No, you disagree with my motives. - 15/11/2010 01:06:54 AM 781 Views
The Founding Fathers of the US? - 15/11/2010 10:18:32 AM 815 Views
"Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God". - 15/11/2010 01:15:33 PM 851 Views
I'm sure bin Laden completely agrees - 15/11/2010 01:32:53 PM 826 Views
When you give me an example of Jefferson murdering women and children that analogy will work. - 15/11/2010 01:49:04 PM 763 Views
yes because Jefferson was a PARAGON of virtue himself - 15/11/2010 02:17:58 PM 860 Views
I wasn't aware I'd made that statement. - 15/11/2010 02:25:27 PM 686 Views
nvm, I was going to argue but I have decided not to *NM* - 15/11/2010 07:46:42 PM 459 Views
So you are being completely subjective here? It is wrong, unless it is for a cause you support? *NM* - 15/11/2010 02:30:37 PM 385 Views
No, it's a question of precedence. - 15/11/2010 04:13:04 PM 707 Views
government as a social contract is an opinion. - 15/11/2010 07:47:57 PM 767 Views
His analogy works very well, and you are still being subjective. - 15/11/2010 08:23:25 PM 946 Views
The precedence is inherent in the statement; that was Jeffersons point. - 15/11/2010 09:17:01 PM 907 Views
Re: The precedence is inherent in the statement; that was Jeffersons point. - 15/11/2010 10:52:40 PM 725 Views
I don't believe that at all. - 16/11/2010 12:08:26 AM 606 Views
Re: As I mentioned numerous times. - 16/11/2010 11:52:36 PM 828 Views
Re: As I mentioned numerous times. - 17/11/2010 01:34:29 AM 801 Views
No, its relevancy is difficult to grasp. - 16/11/2010 07:19:11 AM 960 Views
Maybe I just have an unusual perspective. - 16/11/2010 04:15:39 PM 862 Views
I didn't know they bombed a SCHOOL!!! - 16/11/2010 04:31:24 PM 742 Views
Please. If there were any soldiers in the WTC on 911 it was coincidental. - 16/11/2010 04:40:51 PM 761 Views
perhaps, but not all important targets are military targets. - 16/11/2010 04:57:20 PM 915 Views
Not all important targets are LEGITIMATE targets either. - 16/11/2010 05:06:11 PM 735 Views
I don't wish one, but I hate sidebars - 16/11/2010 05:09:33 PM 792 Views
All about priorities; your call. - 16/11/2010 10:33:53 PM 706 Views
That's so many hours of my life I'll never get back. - 16/11/2010 10:41:55 PM 771 Views
This your first time on the CMB? - 16/11/2010 11:18:03 PM 737 Views
No, NOW I know what's going on! - 16/11/2010 04:36:04 PM 889 Views
Still doesn't work. - 16/11/2010 04:50:58 PM 907 Views
Those last sentences are going way overboard. - 16/11/2010 05:08:40 PM 737 Views
Terrorism is inexcusable and indefensible, but at least there's a LOGIC to it. - 16/11/2010 05:21:15 PM 830 Views
First of all, your generalizations were misguided. - 16/11/2010 05:40:55 PM 845 Views
Of course I disagree, but that's a different and older debate. - 16/11/2010 11:10:23 PM 1015 Views
I will try to be brief. Try. - 16/11/2010 11:28:28 PM 817 Views
Heh. - 16/11/2010 11:55:40 PM 742 Views
mostly agree - 16/11/2010 11:18:14 PM 693 Views
. . . and now I'm thinking you're the one willfully misunderstanding. - 16/11/2010 05:36:15 PM 769 Views
Not willful, at least. - 17/11/2010 12:29:42 AM 729 Views
sorry - 16/11/2010 11:24:44 PM 797 Views
Well, you know what I was going on about, if that helps? *NM* - 16/11/2010 11:25:18 PM 452 Views
"Subversion" has the connotation of treason, however wrongly. - 15/11/2010 01:32:06 PM 823 Views
Re: Non-sequitur, non-sequitur, CAPS LOCK, opinion, CAPS LOCK. - 15/11/2010 10:45:41 PM 637 Views
Either my mind moves much faster than ya'lls, or ya'll are deliberately missing the point. - 16/11/2010 12:05:28 AM 839 Views
I am curious. - 16/11/2010 01:10:52 AM 683 Views
Argggh, ya got me! - 16/11/2010 05:11:41 PM 684 Views
the dictionary has -nia and -iums. - 16/11/2010 05:16:32 PM 785 Views
I prefer "millennia" but recall someone telling me that's not technically right. - 16/11/2010 05:32:34 PM 726 Views
well, in American English, they're apparantly both "correct" *NM* - 16/11/2010 06:13:40 PM 491 Views
In American English, almost anything is. - 17/11/2010 01:02:15 AM 821 Views
It is right. It's the one thing that's easy in Latin and Greek declensions. - 16/11/2010 06:33:12 PM 734 Views
You call then "neutral" over there? Interesting. *NM* - 16/11/2010 06:42:00 PM 484 Views
Neutral, neutrum, neuter, whatever. Details. *NM* - 16/11/2010 06:45:29 PM 429 Views
Do only neuter words end in -um? - 16/11/2010 06:57:39 PM 803 Views
Yes. I think so, anyway - been a good while since I had Latin. - 16/11/2010 07:12:09 PM 785 Views
Thanks. Maybe that's what I'm remembering. - 16/11/2010 07:17:05 PM 761 Views
IIRC, the number of "n"s was the issue. - 17/11/2010 01:06:24 AM 777 Views
Should definitely be two. *NM* - 17/11/2010 01:48:51 AM 393 Views
Ah, thanks. - 17/11/2010 02:08:08 AM 774 Views
Silly laptops.... - 16/11/2010 05:32:34 PM 868 Views
- 16/11/2010 05:35:22 PM 703 Views
I'm horrible about using "conjugate" as a blanket term. - 17/11/2010 01:09:34 AM 825 Views
I'm definitely missing the point. - 16/11/2010 06:58:17 AM 796 Views
Well, hopefully we've cleared things up now. *MN* - 16/11/2010 05:30:46 PM 791 Views
I don't know if it qualifies as subversive... - 14/11/2010 02:47:34 AM 903 Views
Re: That's not bad. - 14/11/2010 01:38:02 PM 787 Views
The Chap - 14/11/2010 01:58:27 PM 669 Views
Thanks. - 14/11/2010 03:04:49 PM 768 Views
All my subversive websites are religious. - 15/11/2010 02:26:42 AM 743 Views
Re: I'm certainly interested. - 15/11/2010 03:37:11 AM 763 Views
Well, okay then. - 15/11/2010 04:23:35 AM 835 Views
Some stuff I think is pretty neat: - 15/11/2010 07:24:41 PM 849 Views
Re: Noice, noice. - 15/11/2010 11:01:31 PM 782 Views
That first link is really good. - 15/11/2010 11:18:25 PM 878 Views
Re: Ha! - 16/11/2010 11:55:42 PM 658 Views
Re: Also, I like your poems. *NM* - 17/11/2010 01:02:27 AM 431 Views
Re: Dude. - 20/11/2010 02:14:38 AM 846 Views
you mean besides this one? *NM* - 15/11/2010 07:55:03 PM 334 Views
Re: I AM NOT SUBVERTING NEBHEAD!! - 15/11/2010 11:02:10 PM 773 Views
Re: William Faulkner would be unhappy with my thread. - 16/11/2010 08:29:42 PM 741 Views
My work here is done. - 16/11/2010 08:34:22 PM 709 Views
Re: Yes, it's fairly obvious that you need to respond. *NM* - 16/11/2010 11:40:10 PM 458 Views
I often wish I didn't. - 17/11/2010 01:49:33 AM 667 Views
I'm calling you out on this one. - 18/11/2010 12:06:17 AM 726 Views
It's not perfect, but it's the lesser of many evils, IMHO. - 18/11/2010 01:12:43 AM 789 Views
You people with your words. - 16/11/2010 08:34:17 PM 859 Views
. - 16/11/2010 08:54:22 PM 643 Views
Re: I still say we should start a band. - 20/11/2010 02:42:48 AM 798 Views
Re: Man, that attack on Cameron is brutal. *NM* - 20/11/2010 02:47:12 AM 411 Views
Re: Awesome. - 16/11/2010 11:38:29 PM 774 Views

Reply to Message