kevirwin wrote:

You said ****some**** aspects of libertarian philosophy have merit, the
implication of that IS that some dont, I have asked you now several
times to explain WHICH libertarian ideas do not have any merit and why?

I dont care what your arrogant opinion of your neighbour or me is kev,
I asked what is it about libertarian philosophy that has no merit for
YOU.

What is it about the idea that YOUR life belongs to YOU and that the
primary and moral function of the state is to uphold YOUR right to live
YOUR life according to OUR values while in the pursuit of YOUR
happiness?

WHY and HOW cant the idea of that work for YOU?

Four words, Live and let live.

Five words
Persuade me dont force me.

mikegordge@xtra.co.nz wrote:

Okay, Mikey, the clock struck 12 months ago, you pumpkin; I concede
that it is not possible to have a rational conversation with you about
anything. I will honor my word to reply to any of your paranoid
delusional insanity (I'm also having people I know, check out your
work, I told them how funny it was), but the replies are going to be
much shorter, maybe three or four words, but I feel you will be able to
understand them.

Again, to help you out, I'll point out your flaws and inconsistencies
from the entire post this one last time, without any snipping ....

kevirwin wrote:

Qualifying statements usually mean followed by crap kev.

"I want the world and the people of America to know (that's the
qualifying statement) that I did not have sexual relations with that
woman"

nah Strawman piffle snipped

He's a typical whinging nauseating nasal whining pommy fuckwit.

Back to the subject Strawman.

Which part of libertarian philosophy does not have merit and why, kev?

NOTE I'm not after a sermon about what you think of your neighbours,
this is a question for YOU kev.

This debating and defending YOUR ideas was YOUR idea remember.

Now have a crack at sticking to the subject, keep it brief and lets
deal with one idea at a time.

Michael Gordge

kevirwin wrote:

Mind your own business, this is not about me, its about your silly
ideas which you said you could defend.

? You ascribe attributes to my

You raised the subject of YOUR daughter, I was talking purely
philosophically.

By Radio or TV?????????????????????????? dont be silly kev, that was a
socialist experiment.

The identical situation can give rise to many totally different
*feelings* and ALL totally rational and logical feelings, it all
depends on the context of what they know about the situation, and NONE
of the feelings are *transmitted* by anyone.

kevirwin wrote:

Now stop the silly Strawmans kev.

You will spot your words kev they have lots of ?s at the end, its a
sign of frustration at you not being able to defend your ideas.

"Have I ever talked **politically** in this
forum, at all, other than telling you there were **some** aspects of
both "anarchism" and "libertarianism" that have merit???"

Now kev, seen as you wont say which aspects of libertarian philosophy
you feel dont have merit, then perhaps you might like to say which ones
DO have merit and how you reached that idea, this was YOUR idea to
debate YOUR ideas kev and so far all you have done is attacke m and
come up with all sorts of silly Strawman nonsenses.

Michael Gordge

kevirwin wrote:

Kev - it took you a couple of weeks - it's been taking Mikey years!

I am disappointed in Mike - he did the ultimate child-like thing of
rubbing your nose in what he considered to be triumph. He won!!!? Won
what?, we will never know!

Mike has lost so much in other ways - and only guys like you know what
I mean :)))

See you round the galaxy............. xxx

Tracy wrote:

Nothing but her usual socialist piffle, goodness me Tracy, kev made
several accusations about me, I defended myself in the only way I know
how, with my ideas and explanations of my philosophical and political
beliefs, which kev said he would never run away from, he ran away, so
of course that is a victory to me and only a fucking cry baby envy
ridden socialist would condemn and ridicule a winner, let's all be
fucking losers eh Tracy the socialist's way eh Tracy, FFS, no wonder
you spend so much time crying about yourself.

Michael Gordge

kevirwin wrote:

lawrey wrote:

Only a silly and total and utter fuckwit would say that defending human
liberty from evil socialist scum is childish antagonism.

Kevirwin is being a typcial PC communist scumbag, trying to control and
dictate how peaceful human beings, promoting something other than
fucking socialist fucking nonsense, behave and speak.

I am defending my liberty, I am defending myself and my right to say
what I feel needs to be said and I will use any method that I deem
appropriate when dealing with the enemy of the free man, it really is
that simple.