I'm only repeating myself at this time, so yeah this seems to go nowhere

What was the original topic being discussed ?

Poverty and the percentage of "responsibility" of one's own predicament

you're a god damn disgrace. I'll say it again. the topic was ignorance vs innocence. you brought up feigning ignorance. You inserted an unrelated item. but magically its my fucking fault

Ignorance is not a defensible position in the court of law lol

I'll try to lay it out for you as simply as possible

I accuse most of the people who appear ignorant of mostly just feigning ignorance, but that doesn't detract from the argument that their ignorance does not make them innocent. Either way it is the exact same argument. Because whether someone is actually ignorant or only feigns ignorance is entirely irrelevant.

Have a good afternoon gentleman. Bill of rights above all and such

So you put emphasis on my saying "feigning ignorance is not acceptable" even though that was not the argument I was making, it was my trying to demonstrate that I think even lower of those people than perhaps other people would.

if it wasn't your argument why fucking insert it into the discussion?

Reminder the Bill of Rights were amendments

Because you're not talking to a robot, but to a human

If you demand me to behave like a robot, don't even talk to me at all

>I'm a human bean
the least I expect is coherent communication.

Oh ya, cause you never ever say something in the spur of the moment that isn't immediately obvious as part of your argumentation, fuck off

There's an insult for you

@Imaorange true, but they were assumed in the original Constitution and only added explicitly because the states recognized that they had to be written down to make sure those assumptions wouldn't erode over time

Are you so sure they were assumed by everyone? I see it more as the states recognizing if they didn't make them explicit they *would* be eroded, with purpose.

Granted

I don't necessarily trust a bunch of Freemasons

^^ - Look at our current situation now. Even w/it being explicitly written, we've got ppl explicitly trying to erode them lol

Actually I don't, or if I do its exaggerated and played off as a humourous remark. and if I've confused anyone I at least attepmt to take fucking responsibility and rephrase immediately, not just wave it off

It was more that the they were busy trying to make a system that works before putting in any rights

@Dubdogelmo that's a poor framing. In the Lockean tradition, the rights were always assumed to be there, a priori

mister fuckin 'personal responsibility' takes thirty minutes to admit he inserted an irrelevent point

What, you claimed I equated feigning ignorant to actual ignorance, when I never made that claim

So don't now pretend there weren't two people involved in this bullshittery

Sure cos it came out of the British tradition that enshrined these rights, however they definitely put it in via amendments to separate it from the actual process of building a workable system

I never actually said equate, I never even said you compared them, I said you moved the goal post and included it in the discussion out of nowhere

@Dubdogelmo fair enough

aiiight, new subject. This is going in circles

Yeah fuck this

Anyone like eggnog ?

'tis the season for it

Ehhhh

does christian brothers holiday nog count?

only variant I've had so far

Never had it. What's it like ?

... a very sweet and heavy beverage

well christian brothers is a brandy maker, so, work from there

I'd preferr Coconut Kalua or Peppermint Schnapps Cocoa