"David half the people are dead against gay marriage. The number may even be higher. The courts forced this on the state too, just like they forced medical mj."

And, like the Civil Rights movement, there are some things ignorant populations should be made to accept by the courts - like not discriminating against harmless groups of people.




"Your explaination of how it is homosexuality came to be removed from the DSM V.II forgot to mention it took a ten+ years campaign for homosexual activsts to accomplish the review and removal. In my humble opinion, the Homosexuals have left us a template on activism."


Let's emulate them, then .... activistically speaking, of course.



"Activists in our communtiy ought to pressure the AMA to remove "dependancy" from the DSM v. IV if rapid progress is desired."

Sounds good to me - a project we can both work on.




"But, the activist community is working hand in glove with prohibitionists, marketing idea like harm reduction and treatment and just generally palying into the hands of our worst enemies."

I agree that some rich American activists are doing so (and should not be doing so) - but who in the Canadian pot movement is in favor of "treatment" - anyone? In Canada, we define "Harm Reduction" by how many organic strains are on the menue.





"The Szaszians are about the only activists aware of the power medicine has aquired in shaping our ideas about drugs."

Both Marc Emery and myself quote Szasz all the time on the subject. There's no "non-Szaszian" element to the Canadian cannabis movement, in my opinion.

Buors, you are the last one who should be telling anybody about spelling. What a joke. You make the rest of us look smart. You spelled Kirstie Alley's name wrong and Boislclair's as well as numerous other mistakes.

Look at your spelling and grammar here Banjo Boy:

"So I edon't care what they do to each other. I don't want them such diviants in my social circle....if that makes me a bigot, hand me a medal. I'll proudly wear it. "

Nobody posting here thinks you are right, and even ME falls under the wire of people who you would be friends with, through his own sexual record.

First you tell us you automatically dscount anybody (like me) who is in a church, (bigotry) even if you don't know a thing about that church or the person, then you claim to be a defender of religion.

I think Buors should join Scientology, he would fit in well there, and who knows he might even find a girlfriend and give his busy hands a break? It would be good for him, good for the movement and bad for Scientology, which would be good for the movement.

Bigotry is one of those words that people like you get caught up in the straw man game so easily with. Simply because it is so easy for those with such a severe lack of morals to see that the idea of speaking out against known bigoted organizations (such as Scientology, the Ku Klux Klan, etc) is, in and of itself, an act of bigotry.
But you know, it doesn't work that way, claiming that you hold a moral high ground because you hate others is depraved thought.

Quote:

---

Sure there is such a thing as spirituality in this mans universe.

---

There is room for anything within 'your' universe that justifies your morally abhorrant stance.

Quote:

---

Now you forgot, John Stuart Mill, Mark Twain, George Orwell, Frederic Bastiat, Ludwing vo Mises, Rothbard, Rockwell and a host of other Classic liberals that I admire and quote often. Am I a one book guy or what eh?

I read a hundred books, they were all on liberty because that is the topic that piques my interst.

---

Von Mises, Rothbard and Rockwell are NOT classic libertarians, but modern libertarians, and all three are deeply connected with each other as well as being all too often quoted by bigots wearing a thin veneer of libertarianism.
Sorry, but when you have read a couple of thousand more works, you might actually begin to see some insight into the workings of humanity.

Skimming for like minded ideas does not equate to mental fitness.

I myself read about a book a day and have been doing so for about 38 years. (In spite of having dropped out of high school when the school board accused the school district superintendent of being a Warlock and the new sup shuffled the admin. I have since went on to gain several degrees and still make a point of advancing my higher learning on an ongoing basis.)

Quote:

---

Jeffery Dalhmer...well who knew he was evil until after he was caught? Do we confront him. That would be a fight or flight moment that would be telling. My best street fighting days are behind me now so I would prefer to face the Dahlemer's of the world with a medium weight handgun.

---

Well as we have seen in other statements you have made in other threads we already know you belief it would be your right and your pleasure to shoot a child in the back if you caught him in your back yard stealing your lawnmower or bicycle. But then by your own argument Dahmer was of sound mind and not sick at all.
I suppose you would at least fire a shot over the childs head to get him running first though, I can't imagine you would look him in the eyes.

Quote:

---

As far as drug prohibition goes, the roles reverses and I have to confront the Scientologists or anyone else with the cold hard facts of their evilness.

---

You still haven't figured out that your Ssazs arguments are in fact Scientologys, written in order to give better arguments for the prohibition side.
Yes Ssazs is a scientologist, a scientologist who took up his career specifically with the intent to discredit the medical institution for quick profit from the tobacco industry and weaken the better part of psychiatry by focusing on the fringe shrinks who profit on quick help books because scientology is commonly refered to as deranged.

Quote:

---

So the Scientologists do good work in my eyes.

---

Yep I would expect no less.

Quote:

---

I just want them not to persecute me. I could care less what they thought of my lifestyle choice and plenty of people do think drug taking is immoral. I won't try and change their morality or start calling them names just because they don't like my moral behavior.

---

If that was even slightly true you wouldn't keep posting such morally backward excrement.

"Now you forgot, John Stuart Mill, Mark Twain, George Orwell, Frederic Bastiat, Ludwing vo Mises, Rothbard, Rockwell and a host of other Classic liberals that I admire and quote often. Am I a one book guy or what eh?"

Orwell was a "Democratic Socialist", not a "Classic liberal":

"Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism, as I understand it."

http://www.orwell.ru/library/essays/wiw/english/e_wiw

I understand you are a professional write Chris.

Me, I'm just a hack. Even the letters I write are bad grammar and spelling.

The point was to get my name right so that search engines can find the remarks in the future.

I could care less if people think I'm right Chris.

The point is that there is a whole lot grey between love and hate and I made that argument to the narrow minded that see no gray in the world of homosexuality. You either love them or hate them. That's an ugly choice. So I prefer to fight the politcal correctness of such nonsense.

I pretty well knew what was going to come out of your posts so I headed you off at the pass.

I go out of my way to avoid Church goers. Church of the Universe, Church of Scientology, it's all the same to me. You know, it akes a certain mindset to want to join a church. I have come to understand that I will not get along with people who are church joiners no matter what the faith.
I knew that ever since I was 14 and have avoided people of faith ever since. I don't hate those people, they are just of a mindset that I find perplexing. The transendent is an area where each leaps of faith defy logic. Not for me.

And I got other things that interest me more than the study of humanity's 3000 religions. My interests are liberty and those who write about it. There is already a lifetimes worth of reading about liberty on the Internet.

So we have to make decisions in life. I decided I have no time for the warfare between the religions and I have plenty of time to study liberty.

Is there something wrong with that choice?

I don't begrudge people a lifetime of religious study. They are thereafter capable of producing A and E type shows like the history of the Bible that can give the not so interested like me a good overview of it all in 8 one hour episodes.

So I don't claim to be a defender of religion, I defend your right to believe in religion.

And because of my RC childhood indoctrinations, I relate closest to that language. Just because I reject the notion of rising from the dead does not mean that there is no such a thing as a vice or a virtue. For some, their virtues become a vice.

I don't accept invitation to people's homes who have insulted me. Why would I go to your home to be insulted?
I would just have to leave.

I doubt I will be joining the Scientologists any time soon. I have a rock solid foundation of intellectual argument based on Anarco-capitalism that I think provides clairty on man as an economizer. Most of the writers I enjoy are atheists. They speak the language I hear and understand.

Wodan.


Expressing the world in black and white colors as in you either like homosexuals or you hate them is what is depraved thought. There is a whole continuum of gray on that scale.

All religions are inheriently bigoted against other religions. Religion deals in transendental ideas. They all speak a different language about existential unprovable ideas of the unknown. There are some 3000 religions. The Church of Scientology, the Church of the Universe and the Roman Catholic Church are but three examples of religions that do not appeal to me.

Libertarian is a relatively new word coined by Murray Rothbard because liberal came to mean democrat over time in American politics. The liberals in Canada have not been liberal for 100 years now so a new politcal moniker was needed. The political philosophy is based on individualism which is Classic Liberalism as opossed to all collectivist ideologies. Economics that fit hand in glove with the politcal philosphy is called Anarcho-capitalism and Ludwig von Mises is the intellectual giant who paved the road for others like Rothbard and Rockwell to continue the work.

Obviously you have never read Human Action in the thousands of books you have read or you would not dismiss the man's intellectual influence as bigotry. The beautiful thing about reading Mises and Rothbard is that they trump the arguments of both Keynes "animal spirits" interventionist economics and Marx's totalitarianism of communism.

You can believe in whatever economic model you like, but relating the intellectuals of the ideology to bigotry is to see their wrting through the rose color of socialisms mote.

Once again we see the demonizer come jumping right out of you. There is but one way humanity has ever devised to combat plunder and that is to make plunder more difficult than work. Making the case that private citizens who protect their own private property by force of arms does not equate to I can hardly wait to blow someone away.

I would prefer that theives steal from you rather than me. But if they choose me then I would prefer to have the means of protecting my personal property up to and including the use of lethal force. New Orleans provides the lesson. Those who remained behind and protected their own property still had property when the emergency was over.

Quote:

---

You still haven't figured out that your Ssazs arguments are in fact Scientologys, written in order to give better arguments for the prohibition side.
Yes Ssazs is a scientologist, a scientologist who took up his career specifically with the intent to discredit the medical institution for quick profit from the tobacco industry and weaken the better part of psychiatry by focusing on the fringe shrinks who profit on quick help books because scientology is commonly refered to as deranged.

---

Obviously you have never read either Ceremonial Chemistry nor Our Right to Drugs by Thomas Szasz.

They are the two most powerfully argued cases for the repeal of drug prohibition yet written.


It is no accident that both the No.1 and No.2 sucessful Letter to the Editor writers in Canada are both fans of Thomas Szasz and libertarians to boot. Szasz made all the intellectual arguments that empower me to take on the Therapeutic State.

So turns out your just as big a bigot as I supposedly am. I made the argument that we all have our biases, our own prejudices and you do indeed provide the proof.

I don't see anything wrong with that. There will be no meeting of minds on these issues between us. I can appreciate that.

The Lockeian politcal ideology makes the case that we have a property in ownership of ourselves. The mind is an exestential concept. Our brains certainly are our properties until our demise and then we are but dust to history.

There was a great Beatles song that went....I, Me, Mine, I Me, Mine, I, Me, Mine, I me Mine. All through your life I me mine, George Harrison wrote that song. Individualism is the most powerful force in the universe. Authority vs. Autonomy, the age-old struggle will be won by autonomy after everthing else has been tried.

The lawyers can be dealt with by repealing Bar membership requirements and opening up education to the free-market. Soon enough they would be a dime a dozen just like computer programers and the like are today. Remember when anyone who knew computer languages was considered a genius? Now grade 3 students have better skills than programers of the past.

Psychaitry has no place in our courtrooms. The psychatric state of ones mind has about as much business in our courts as the religious state of a person's souls does.

Perhaps Marc Emery ought to think of the insanity plea in his extradition plea. Who else but a mad man would do what he did? The Jury just might buy it. They would allow psychaitrists on both sides. If Marc however decided he found the Lord and repented, we he could present a letter from the priest at sentencing, but there will be no priests testifing about the state of Mr. Emery's soul at the time of his offense.

Psychiatry ought not be allowed but it is because it is a social control method that suits the State for dealing with unconventional persons who exihibit bizzare but not criminal behavior.

The servility stuff applied to me. I didn't even know what the word meant five years ago and now look, proud to declare myself an enemy of the state. All government are inheirently evil. The smaller they are the better off we the people are. We do indeed loose liberty but a smidgen at a time. People born into slavery don't know they are slaves.

You are right that I have nothing to fear from homosexuals but I take umbrage with that position on psychaitry.

Psychaitrists are certifying agents of the state. There are such things as Mental Health Acts that legislate the views of the psychiatric profession into state truths.

Addictions and all the state sponsored treatment out there is a perversion. It's all soul doctoring masqurading as medicine.

They wield politcal clout and authority, so the psychaitrist ought to be feared. There are lots of psychiatric surviors type groups who would love to tell you all about it I'm sure. Even the homosexuals used to live in fear of psychiatric stigmatizations and they did something about it. Drug taking dunderheads all bobbing their heads up and down when told they have an addiction and need treatment as long as the government pays eh.

I accept your argument that truth certainly will not be found in government nor their instruments like the courts. Truth is found in a mans heart.

Have you been down to the police station to fire up a joint and enjoy your liberty lately? Me, I'm still taking advantage of what's left of our freedom of speech to make the case that psychiatric stigmatizations passed off as diagnosis and disorders is ugly stuff.

"Seen further"...oh no...no...no...I make the case that I understand and agree with most of the arguments the intellectuals I admire make. That I am smart enough to have ever had an original idea....that I can see further...Sorry I gave that impression. Only one in about 1 billion humans is capable of comming up with original ideas that no one ever thought of before.

Ha. I can barely write one whole sentence without speling errors and never did understand sentence structure and all the rules for writing English.

Hell, no. Me I'm just a jabroonee who happens to be drawn to the Individual autonomy rather than collective authority end of the politcal spectrum.

Soviet Canuckistan was a Pat Bucanan shot I thought struck a cord. Canadian public school education has ingrained socialism into the fabric of the people. Canadians look to the government to solve all problems fiscal and social and the government accomidates us. Esentially we have achoice between three Interventionist politcal parties. The Conservatives and the Liberals have proven themselves to be corrupt Mutual plunder is the underlying moral code of Canadians. This corruption is entrenched in the fabric of the people. We have corrupt government because the people are corrupt. The leaders are a reflection of the moral and social code of the sheep. Canadians like getting bribed with our own money. The people have choosen a corrupt ideology. Redistribution of wealth at the point of a gun. People who support this plunder always reckon they will get more than they give. The Canadian debt reflects the impossiblity of that poor economic grasp of government financing. Governments cost money, they do not create wealth of any sort. The envious who are alway more numerous than the propserous and entrepeneurially spirited who bring ingenuity and innovation to humanity.

Canada is ruled by the envious. We have become a Sinful State of corruption and greed on the part of the envious.

None of that deserves any support in my humble opinion.

That will not resonate with those who feel they are entittled to the fruits of another man's labor, but as I said, just because the majority voted for theft as a scoial system does not mean the system will work or that it will be moral.

Canada is corrupt. The "central planner" strong central state sets the stage for the worst to rise to the top and indeed they do. With that big pot of money, half the productive out put of the nations labor at stake, it does not surprize me that the most enterprizing ruffians are in control. They will only be able to enrichen themselves through bad economics for so long and then there will be a day of reckoning.

I tried to change things before that day came, but no one in Manitoba was interested in liberty. Manitobans vote for the government who will give them the most lucre. Fat chance liberty stands in such a corrupt atmosphere.

So the sooner it all comes crashing down the shorter the period of economic correction goes the Austrian school of economics.

It's kind of a Lincolnian thing. The country will have be destroyed, and it will destroy itself through fiat cash, before it can be saved. When the people of any civilization have chosen a bad economic ideology there is nothing that can save them. They are doomed to dust.

I tried and now I will stand back and prepare for the inevetiable crash that is certain to occur.

I was a Boy Scout. I will be prepared for the coming debecale.

Well the earliest work on liberal beliefs was written by Livy over 2000 years ago. I can't say who coined the actual work libertarian but I know it was used in writings over 200 years ago.
Keep reading.

And no I have not read those works by Ssazs, I have not finished a single work by your favorite shill. His stuff is just to sophmoric and he has this foolish practice of ignoring factual scientific pathology.
I will stick to real thinkers, thank you.

And just so you know. Unlike you, I hate nobody. But I WILL always speak out against ignorance and bigotry. Someone has too point out the truth when bigots push their excrement.