[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

And? Am I meant to be offended by your insult? Sorry to disappoint you.

It wasn't an insult in the slightest, I'm just quite surprised by your seeming support for fascist regimes and hypothetical totalitarian state-like laws.

I'm quite sure that if I were to suggest a law whereby you were banned from offering your opinions and ever speaking again, or else you would be hung, drawn and quartered, and it was passed, you wouldn't have so much support for 'the law by which this country is governed' then.

Honestly...from what you're saying, why don't we let any old fool off the street pass a new law which may of course endanger anyone of us, but let it pass, because of course that is 'the law'.

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Jack_

It wasn't an insult in the slightest, I'm just quite surprised by your seeming support for fascist regimes and hypothetical totalitarian state-like laws.

I'm quite sure that if I were to suggest a law whereby you were banned from offering your opinions and ever speaking again, or else you would be hung, drawn and quartered, and it was passed, you wouldn't have so much support for 'the law by which this country is governed' then.

Honestly...from what you're saying, why don't we let any old fool off the street pass a new law which may of course endanger anyone of us, but let it pass, because of course that is 'the law'.

You know nothing about me - only your incorrect assumptions - so why are you surprised?

What I am saying is that people who have no idea of the bigger picture really shouldn't get too heavily involved in conversations such as this one when they have so littel understanding on the matter but think they do not need to understand to be able to offer up some rational reason for the beliefs....- proven by your comment about ''letting any old fool pass a new law''.

That confirms your own lack of knowledge on the subject. It seems clear that you have not the remotest idea of what is involved in passing a new Law? Often requiring many years of deliberation / consideration / consultation by official bodies (including non governmental and independant ones) that are involved, the stages involved, the time that it takes and what is involved.

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

You know nothing about me - only your incorrect assumptions - so why are you surprised?

Let's get this straight. I posed some hypothetical questions to you, intended to question your stance on 'living by the law in which this country is governed', i.e. that if ludicrous, uncivilised, fascist laws were passed, would you still be in support of them, as after all, that is 'the law'. You didn't respond to any of these questions...therefore, I'm quite sure I can conclude that you would be in support of such laws being passed. That's not making assumptions.

Questioning laws and questioning government at all times is extremely important, otherwise we put ourselves in a position where things are suppressed and, as I previously stated, we end up living under a totalitarian state. Perhaps you're in support of that...I don't know, but I'd expect the majority aren't. This is why having the right to protest, free speech etc are so important, I'd expect however that you think these should be abolished, as we should live by the law and never question it or the government?

You only have to look at Hitler to see why everything I mentioned in the last paragraph is so important.

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

That confirms your own lack of knowledge on the subject. It seems clear that you have not the remotest idea of what is involved in passing a new Law? Often requiring many years of deliberation / consideration / consultation by official bodies (including non governmental and independant ones) that are involved, the stages involved, the time that it takes and what is involved.

Considering I'm doing an A Level where we've just recently looked into what goes into the process of passing laws, I'm fairly sure I'm clued up on what goes on. Of course the remark I made about 'letting any old fool pass a law' was entirely hypothetical, and you know...not real, or encompassing of actual reality. Hypothetical...but never mind.

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Jack_

Let's get this straight. I posed some hypothetical questions to you, intended to question your stance on 'living by the law in which this country is governed', i.e. that if ludicrous, uncivilised, fascist laws were passed, would you still be in support of them, as after all, that is 'the law'. You didn't respond to any of these questions...therefore, I'm quite sure I can conclude that you would be in support of such laws being passed. That's not making assumptions.

Questioning laws and questioning government at all times is extremely important, otherwise we put ourselves in a position where things are suppressed and, as I previously stated, we end up living under a totalitarian state. Perhaps you're in support of that...I don't know, but I'd expect the majority aren't. This is why having the right to protest, free speech etc are so important, I'd expect however that you think these should be abolished, as we should live by the law and never question it or the government?

You only have to look at Hitler to see why everything I mentioned in the last paragraph is so important.



Considering I'm doing an A Level where we've just recently looked into what goes into the process of passing laws, I'm fairly sure I'm clued up on what goes on. Of course the remark I made about 'letting any old fool pass a law' was entirely hypothetical, and you know...not real, or encompassing of actual reality. Hypothetical...but never mind.

Goodwin's Law just kicked in.

You are reaching a conclusion on what a person thinks when you know know nothing about that person. That's interesting.

Whilst I admire your 'passion' with all respect to you Jack ....An A Level? There's a very true saying about little knowledge being a very dangerous thing.

[Omah]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

Goodwin's Law just kicked in.

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Omah

My work here is done.

right folks, enjoyed the healthy robust nature, be interesting to follow up.

goodnight to you all. Tempus fugit.

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

Goodwin's Law just kicked in.

You are reaching a conclusion on what a person thinks when you know know nothing about that person. That's interesting.

I'm reaching a conclusion based on what you have posted in this thread on a particular subject. Nothing more, nothing less. You posted it, not me.

It's a shame, I was beginning to think that since coming back you had changed, or were starting to change some of your age old tendencies, you know...avoiding or bypassing valid points, resorting to cliches and pedantry. But it seems not. Same old Pyramid, same old techniques.

At the end of the day, Godwin's Law or not, Hitler removed vital civil rights all of which I mentioned in order for him to pass through his fascist, ugly regime. If you don't think things like the right to protest, free speech, and questioning the government and the law are important, then more fool you.

As a side note...the BNP manifesto is in the post. Enjoy.

[Pyramid*]

Originally Posted by Jack_

I'm reaching a conclusion based on what you have posted in this thread on a particular subject. Nothing more, nothing less. You posted it, not me.

It's a shame, I was beginning to think that since coming back you had changed, or were starting to change some of your age old tendencies, you know...avoiding or bypassing valid points, resorting to cliches and pedantry. But it seems not. Same old Pyramid, same old techniques.

At the end of the day, Godwin's Law or not, Hitler removed vital civil rights all of which I mentioned in order for him to pass through his fascist, ugly regime. If you don't think things like the right to protest, free speech, and questioning the government and the law are important, then more fool you.

As a side note...the BNP manifesto is in the post. Enjoy.

Your rather poor attempt at patronising me and throwing your usual brand of personal insults because you are unable to provide any tangible response to my reply to you is shocking.

You may have an extensive vocabulary Jack, but a lot of big words put together when they lack any substance, in reality, to use a well known phrase, are not worth 'jack sh.*'.

'looking into' something at the start of A level is a world away from fully understanding precisely what is involved. That is a fact - we've all been there when we've had a passion for a new topic at school - but honestly: the knowledge you think you have is so limited but you will not realise that till much later on in life.

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

Your rather poor attempt at patronising me and throwing your usual brand of personal insults because you are unable to provide any tangible response to my reply to you is shocking.

Oh come off it...you can hardly talk to anyone about providing any kind of 'tangible response'. Please, don't make me laugh.

Originally Posted by Pyramid*

'looking into' something at the start of A level is a world away from fully understanding precisely what is involved. That is a fact - we've all been there when we've had a passion for a new topic at school - but honestly: the knowledge you think you have is so limited but you will not realise that till much later on in life.

What was that thing you just accused me of again? A 'poor attempt at patronising'? Ah yeah...that was it. Funny that, considering right after you said that you then went on to post this. I can smell hypocrisy...I wonder which direction it's coming from.

Please, do tell me, if experience is oh so necessary in order to justify an opinion, then why is it that some people forty years older than me hold the same opinions with regards to questioning governments and the law and protecting civil rights? Please, I would love to know. If it all boils down to experience, then why is it that some people with tonnes of experience still hold the same opinions as I do?