Being assertive isn't a personality flaw.
Being off-put by assertion because of insecurity is.
A man shouldn't be punished for knowing what he wants and taking it.
That is all.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
- Jim Kauterman
- I'm tired of taking math classes. I just wanna look at monkeys.
Various Uglies
-
philly4 days ago
-
James Marsden: Hollywood's Rebound2 weeks ago
-
breaking tools4 weeks ago
-
Synthesis1 month ago
-
Wholesale Only1 month ago
-
-
-
-
-
Good Luck, Buddy5 months ago
-
Reaching out for nothing5 months ago
-
Push 4 Recovery9 months ago
-
19 comments:
Dayom right!
Except when what he wants is at odds with what you want. Then it's time for mortal kombat.
What do you mean?
Me, or Jim?
Dude you sound so awesome arguing for a Randian selfishness in some post, and then in others you ask people to sacrifice for some absurd greater good preservation jawn.
This post however has my endorsement.
My purpose is preservation of life.
My own included, of course.
Also, I appreciate the use of the adjective 'Randian'. So much.
I detect an 80% percent chance of sarcasm there. You should be clearer online.
None! I think the miscommunication we tend to have on this website is that you interpret my eco-terrorist ways as something other than self-preservation.
Well I don't see how it is self-preservation. The big issue I have really is your agenda impedes on the rights of others, but of course you give rights to animals so that's a more fundamental difference we have.
My policy is that the human species has shown itself quite capable of adaptation.
I feel we should show any species other than ourselves the same courtesy you would show a handicapped person on a bus.
You sound like a natural Jean-Luc Picard.
I agree we should show animals that courtesy, but we're not obliged to in anyway. This argument has obviously gone stale. I don't give animals rights; you do. That's pretty much what it sums up to.
I'm not talking about animal rights.
Then what are you talking about?
Animal rights implies I want individual animals to have RIGHTS in the way we as humans have them.
That is something PETA does, and we both known they are fundamentally misguided.
I'm talking about preventing the ignorant and irreversible destruction of naturally occurring ecosystems. I know you believe that people should have the freedom to make that decision themselves, but that's a little too idealistic in believing in the good of people for me.
So then you think groups of animals or species as a whole should have rights. If they didn't what would be the rationale for not allowing humans to do what they please with them. It's vastly different than individual rights for animals, but it's still imparting some rights to them.
In fact it's pretty much the same way our lovely government gives us rights.
You've got me there, but I just wanted to be clear I'm not gonna let my butt bleed over individuals, and that the species is more important.
However, my rationale is that the entire world benefits and will continue to benefit from biodiversity and unaltered ecosystems.
Post a Comment