Unread

tableau's picture

Rand's ideas come across as being really very reasonable. Nice to see an interview where he had time to flesh out his ideas. Anybody know when an endorsement is likely to come from the Union Leader?

Micah's picture

Are you meaning that Esther, Daniel, etc. obeyed God in all things, or obeyed the earthly king in all things?  I'm thinking you probably mean the former, since Esther disobeyed the law that she couldn't go see the king uninvited (on top of Mordecai disobeying the law to pay homage to the king's officials), Daniel (and similarly Shadrach, Meshach, Obednego) disobeyed the king's laws regarding worship.  I imagine there must have been other laws which they probably would oppose if they were free to set up their own society, but which did not cross the line in their conscience as needing to be stood up to; whereas these other situations called for standing up against the rulers' edicts.

This is similar to that account of Christ and Peter paying taxes so that those collecting them would not be offended -- even though they were not legitimately obligated to do so.  Sometimes living peaceably is more important for the purpose of what we're doing than standing up in defiance.  But there are contexts where standing up against man's laws in order to follow God's Law becomes the priority -- not doing so would damage our purpose even more than trying to go along.

Regardless of what is the proper time and method of refusing to obey, it's a separate question whether the ruler actually has legitimate authority per God's Law of Love to act in the manner he is, to begin with.  Anything which violates the highest Laws of loving God and loving neighbor as self (i.e. committing aggressive violence, theft, etc. against neighbors) is illegitimate.  God may grant that ruler to be able to exist in that time and place, and they will indeed wield the sword as if they are 'punishing evildoing and rewarding good' -- that is the excuse they will give, being the ruler meting out 'justice'.  But God allowing that ruler to exist functionally as a de facto authority is not an endorsement of that authority's system of governance as morally legitimate or as a prescription for any society to follow.  So I guess I'm not seeing where any of this ties our hands today to not pursue a voluntary, anarcho-capitalist society which seeks to better align with God's highest Laws -- refusing to just go along with illegitimate coercion as an unfortunate 'necessity'.

.

Promisekept's picture

Here's a mastodon bone, with a mastodon bone fragment spear-tip embedded in it: found near where I live. Got ANY reasons, or explanations, otherwise? I thought, NOT: but thanks for your kind considerations... 

(Edit note: I thought this was going to be posted under: http://www.acalltopaul.com/comment/3542#comment-3542 , not the top comment. Don't know how I got here, but, oh well...)

[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAnxcxgIQ_M]

Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place. ― Frédéric Bastiat, The Law

Joeinmo's picture

lots of music from those members

...

Freeman15's picture

Thanks for posting!

.

johncarter44's picture

"I bow my head to the beauty of music, the Blues carry my soul."

- Johncarter44

https://www.youtube.com/user/johncarter44

Ron Aldof's picture

Nah

#IStandWithRandAndLiberty!
Let's get back to Liberty and Freedom.
Trump is working with the Establishment.

Ron Aldof's picture

This was great, Thanks for sharing Kathleen....

#IStandWithRandAndLiberty!
Let's get back to Liberty and Freedom.
Trump is working with the Establishment.

hsnowdon's picture

So glad I was able to just listening to the podcast and skip watching this debate. A GOP debate w/out a Paul has to be unbearable.

.

Isabella sj's picture

group has responded and stated they are looking into it. I've sent a message requesting to be alerted if and when it will take place.  But I did find a comment by Isaac Rockett on twitter that states that Rand's supporters have walked away as it is found to be "a cesspool and socialist echo chamber".

Here's Rand's Reddit link https://www.reddit.com/r/randpaul . I wish I knew what the /r/ stands for. New language studies for isabella. LOL.

Here's the Twitter Reddit link: https://twitter.com/r_RandPaul

I went to Popular Liberty looking for silver education and I got GOLD. Thank YOU Question more. https://youtu.be/3eA4OHW8v2k https://youtu.be/mgm8qYEFKwc

just-here-being-me's picture

Check out Randall Carlson.  Go to about 50 mins in this video to get his take on the woolly mammoth.  <iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/G0Cp7DrvNLQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

"I smoke out of spite" - Bill Hicks

just-here-being-me's picture

By lobbyists and then propagandists.  Plenty of people invested in war.  Very shameful.

"I smoke out of spite" - Bill Hicks

stm's picture

There's nothing about you in my memory that sticks out as negative. Nothing. So I was really surprised to see you comment as you did.

From my point of view this thread has nothing to do with Fishy. That video has nothing to do with Fishy. But you bring her into it. Bring in something from another thread that bothered you somehow. It was not courteous to bring her up in this thread, and it wasn't courteous to link to her post.

What's wrong? (please don't read that as a challenge... it's an honest question) Why didn't your comments on that other thread satisfy whatever it was that bugged you? Why do you need to continue going after Fishy here in this post... is it because that post isn't active anymore?

Look at it this way.... someone brand new, someone who never was at the DP or PL comes happens upon this site and reads this post. Then they read the comments. They click on your link.... what are they going to read? An obviously enraged Fishy and some comments rebuking her.

How does any of that contribute to the spread of Liberty?

So what she went off. It happens to all of us. We have a fit and rant. Sometimes the ranter returns and apologizes; sometimes s/he doesn't. So what?

Like Fight Club, what happened in that thread should have remained in that thread. Continuing the fight in other threads just prolongs whatever ill feelings, frustrations, whatever were had. We shouldn't let such feeling fester at all.

As for you suggesting that I don't support Rand.... where does that come from?

'If' is the middle word in LIFE... I always think of that line when I see that word.

If I don't support Rand? Kinda assumes I don't and you know what happens when you assume.

Why do you make it sound as if it's a requirement to get angry when anyone says anything negative about Rand? What others think or feel about Rand can't touch me. I know what I think and feel and I'm confident he's the best candidate for the job. And b/c I am confident I'm not going to waste my energy on negative feelings. I'm not going to be hurt or cry or get angry about what anybody says about him. My goodness, how thin-skinned do ya gotta be to get upset about what someone says about Rand? I learned to let go of that with Ron. Neither Ron nor Rand hold pity parties for every negative comment against them, why would I engage in such behavior?

I didn't write what I did because I'm a fan. LOL I'm not that kind of person. I don't have fans and I especially don't make fans outta anyone I only know through a blog. That's too weird for me to even entertain.

I wrote what I did because, even though you strongly disagree... it was unnecessary and therfore, IMO, unkind. Fishy has absolutely nothing to do with this post. After reading your comment 601 (and all the comments in that thread) I don't see how you cannot see that there was no reason to pull Fishy in here. What she said in that other thread isn't related. It's as if you're saying that because Fishy put a medal on Santilli's chest, every thread from her comment forward that mentions Santilli will now warrant a mention of Fishy.

If you say it wasn't your intention to raise animosity towards Fishy, then I accept that. That you thought it... ironic?... that this video pops up after Fishy's so-called "gospel truth" comment about Santilli, still doesn't offer me a sound reason to bring her up and link to that other thread. Could just be me.

As you wrote in your 601:

"...we all do, have an opportunity to start with a clean slate here and it's up to us to turn it into something wonderful (and dare I say better than DP), or to fuck it up."

I want this place to be something wonderful, too. A place where compassion and forgiveness are given freely, without asking for anything in return. When a cornered dog growls and bares its teeth, why feel the need to attack? Sometimes it takes more courage to let go than to continue grabbing at someone you feel crossed the line.

That's the point I'm trying to make. If you don't see it, you don't see it. Won't make me think less of you. I harbor no ill-will towards you. I still see you as a friend of Liberty. This just may be something we can't see eye to eye on. It happens. Let's not do each other harm.

Laugh. It makes you feel good.

BaneMaler's picture

Enjoy.

Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
Never Be Defeated! https://youtu.be/XmTmTMcdxOs

BaneMaler's picture

It would likely be a guaranteed victory for Paul.  This is how its done.  Hope he impressed them enough to caucus.

Now the Lord is that Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.
Never Be Defeated! https://youtu.be/XmTmTMcdxOs

Pages