09-24-2016, 01:01 AM
So the poor little thing was offended?
Poor baby. Here, have an organically grown bottle of soy milk to soothe your frazzled nerves. It's a jungle out there, ain't it?
Don't worry none - mommy and daddy will keep you safe and sound from the realities - and the joys - of normal livin'.
No one has a right not to be offended, even this frail little snowflake, For example, I'm offended that he's a wuss and thinks he has a right to wussify MY world. Now, since we're BOTH offended, how is it that his offended is a better brand of offended than MY offended? Why does he get special consideration for his offendedness? See? That right there is the very thing that proves no one has a right not to be offended - if he had any such right, then of course I would too, and since our individual offendedness is diametrically opposed, they both necessarily cancel one another out... leaving no such right for either of us.
"Human Rights"? "Civil Rights"? No such thing. There are only Rights, no modifiers. As soon as you put conditions on them, or have an issuing authority, they cease to become actual "rights", and then are mere "privileges", to be issued to whom they please by the governing authorities.
I have no Human Rights nor any Civil Rights. I have only rights, and God help the ones who endanger them, for I swear that their privileges to do so will suddenly become very, very endangered.
Poor baby. Here, have an organically grown bottle of soy milk to soothe your frazzled nerves. It's a jungle out there, ain't it?
Don't worry none - mommy and daddy will keep you safe and sound from the realities - and the joys - of normal livin'.
No one has a right not to be offended, even this frail little snowflake, For example, I'm offended that he's a wuss and thinks he has a right to wussify MY world. Now, since we're BOTH offended, how is it that his offended is a better brand of offended than MY offended? Why does he get special consideration for his offendedness? See? That right there is the very thing that proves no one has a right not to be offended - if he had any such right, then of course I would too, and since our individual offendedness is diametrically opposed, they both necessarily cancel one another out... leaving no such right for either of us.
"Human Rights"? "Civil Rights"? No such thing. There are only Rights, no modifiers. As soon as you put conditions on them, or have an issuing authority, they cease to become actual "rights", and then are mere "privileges", to be issued to whom they please by the governing authorities.
I have no Human Rights nor any Civil Rights. I have only rights, and God help the ones who endanger them, for I swear that their privileges to do so will suddenly become very, very endangered.
Diogenes was eating bread and lentils for supper. He was seen by the philosopher Aristippus, who lived comfortably by flattering the king.
Said Aristippus, ‘If you would learn to be subservient to the king you would not have to live on lentils.’ Said Diogenes, ‘Learn to live on lentils and you will not have to be subservient to the king.’
Said Aristippus, ‘If you would learn to be subservient to the king you would not have to live on lentils.’ Said Diogenes, ‘Learn to live on lentils and you will not have to be subservient to the king.’