Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Ray Callis Hatton III

Are Wild Horses Native To Us? Blm View Challenged

Recommended Posts

So uh, what does this have to do with "Replying to Are Wild Horses Native To Us? Blm View Challenged".

All this talk about controlling horses and bison and stuff. Are we all just bored? Lol. Carry on.

I was just wondering what Ray is thinking when he comes back to this thread. Talk about a tangent gone wild! :D

Share this post


Link to post
When it comes to commenting on public land being made private though, there is good reason to voice opinion since the public land in question IS our business.

The usual retort when I ask what the "public" in "public lands" (or "public schools" or "public parks") means is that "we all own it".

This is patently untrue. If you own something, you can sell it. But you cannot sell "your" public land/school/park, nor even the infintesimal part of it that would seem to fall your due. You do not own it nor any part of it. "Public lands" are not owned by the "public"—they are owned by the government. There is a huge difference.

That's one important reasson the federal government should own almost no land, anywhere in the union. It gives them 'way too much control over what happens in too many places.

Lehi

P.S.: No, "we" are not the government.

Share this post


Link to post
What are the first three words of the US Constitution?

"We, the people".

However, that completely misconstrues the words.

It says, "We, the people of the United States, ... do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America." It does not say, by any reasonable interpretation of the words (and certainly not the contexts), that the people are the government. Government is, by definition, an entity that controls people, that confines and retricts them. If any one person were ever to do what government does routinely, he'd be locked up in jail, at best, unless he's acting as an agent of the government.

Lehi

Share this post


Link to post

So uh, what does this have to do with "Replying to Are Wild Horses Native To Us? Blm View Challenged".

All this talk about controlling horses and bison and stuff. Are we all just bored? Lol. Carry on.

I apologized here.

It's taken on a life of its own.

Lehi

Share this post


Link to post

I apologized here.

It's taken on a life of its own.

Lehi

No need to apologize, I could just tell we were all a little bored and needed something a little more stimulating. And what could be more stimulating than a little political discussion?

Share this post


Link to post

No need to apologize, I could just tell we were all a little bored and needed something a little more stimulating. And what could be more stimulating than a little political discussion?

Actually, I hope it is not "political"—I hope it's "economic".

There's a difference, slim though it may appear to some.

Lehi

P.S.: Happy Flag Day to all USmericans hereabouts. LS

Share this post


Link to post

Actually, I hope it is not "political"—I hope it's "economic".

There's a difference, slim though it may appear to some.

Lehi

P.S.: Happy Flag Day to all USmericans hereabouts. LS

Happy Flag day.

Share this post


Link to post

Lehi:

Is your belief that the government aught not to be able to do anything a privte citizen can not do?

We routinely lock people up for violations of the law. (It is right there in the Constitution. You know the part about due process of law thing). If a private citizen we're to do that. It would be considered a violation of the law itself and they would be put in legal hazzard.

Share this post


Link to post
Is your belief that the government aught not to be able to do anything a privte citizen can not do?

Not quite.

Remember that the Founding Documents state that governments derive their just "powers" (not "rights") from the consent of the people. People have the right to detain others who are harming them. A just power of the state is to detain those who have harmed others. We have, to a nearly complete extent, ceded this power to the state. We have also nearly totally ceded the right to kill someone to the state. We, however, retain that right in situtations we label "self defense". But this right pre-existed the state, and our putting into the hands of the state is not absolute.

The state has no legitimate power that an individual, absent the state, could not legitimately exercise himself. Otherwise, the state could not derive that power from him.

It does not matter whether a million people decide that the state should be able to do something: if no one of them can do it without violating the rights of any other, then their numbers do not change the fact that they do not have the legitimate power to do it as a group, either. You cannot delegate that which you do not have.

Governments are an extension of the individual, nothing more. If they are "more", they are not legitimate.

Lehi

Share this post


Link to post

Lehi:

Incorrect. Government derive their just powers by the consent of the governed. We have agreed to follow the laws that we make collectively. We also retain the right to change those laws when we collectively agree to their change.

The key phrase you are missing is "without due process of law". You individually have a right to violate the law. You also have the right to face the consequences for that violation.

The govenment is not some foreign entity that imposes its will on us. We the people agree to be governed. Without a state/system of government(Everything from a simple tribal cousel to a highly diverse multifaceted system such as ours). Without which there is anarchy. Even the Church is a form of government.

Share this post


Link to post
I was just wondering what Ray is thinking when he comes back to this thread. Talk about a tangent gone wild! :D

Well, its not exactly what I focused on and as it may have applied to Mormon Apologetics, but I guess technically people are not going off topic since the OP is just the posting of the article itself, which is not just about the findings but also how the findings are being applied by animal activists to effect the regulation of land.

Share this post


Link to post

The govenment is not some foreign entity that imposes its will on us. We the people agree to be governed. Without a state/system of government(Everything from a simple tribal cousel to a highly diverse multifaceted system such as ours). Without which there is anarchy. Even the Church is a form of government.

I'm sorry, are you trying to say that there exists something that the government does which does not, in the end, boil down to lethal force or the threat thereof, and also that the Church likewise makes use of force or the threat thereof?

This seems an incredibly - literally unbelievably - naive and historically uninformed view.

Share this post


Link to post

Log:

I never said that LDS use lethal force in the pursuit of their religion. We have voluntarily submitted ourselves to Church government to the extent that we do try people for their membership in the Church.

That was not always the case(Ananias and Sapphira also sold their land, but withheld a portion of the sales, having decided that they did not wish to give it all to the common purse. Ananias presented his donation to Peter claiming that it was the entire amount. Peter replied, "Why is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit?" Peter pointed out that Ananias was in control of the money and could give or keep it as he saw fit, but that he had withheld it from Peter and lied about it, and stated that Ananias had not only lied to Peter, but also to God. Ananias died on the spot, and as a result, everyone who heard the tale became afraid. Three hours later, his wife told the same lie and suffered the same fate).

Share this post


Link to post

I was just wondering what Ray is thinking when he comes back to this thread. Talk about a tangent gone wild! :D

ERay was answering your post which stated that free roaming wild horses and buffalo did not cause the environmental damage that cattle grazing did. You misunderstood part of my comment. I was not talking about present day, I was pointing out that buffalo herds of 100 to 150 years ago caused environmental damage that is still visable today. If you don't think free roaming wild horses cause envirinmental damage take a trip to the Nevada desert. Where wild horse herds take over it soon becomes a place where other animal species can not survive.

Share this post


Link to post

ERay was answering your post which stated that free roaming wild horses and buffalo did not cause the environmental damage that cattle grazing did. You misunderstood part of my comment. I was not talking about present day, I was pointing out that buffalo herds of 100 to 150 years ago caused environmental damage that is still visable today. If you don't think free roaming wild horses cause envirinmental damage take a trip to the Nevada desert. Where wild horse herds take over it soon becomes a place where other animal species can not survive.

The Ray i was refering to was the OP.

And where did i claim that free roaming wild horses don't cause damage? Please go back and reread my remarks because what you think i said, i never said.

As to the historic bison herds, i don't know that it's accurate to claim that just because a land feature still exists a century later, that it proves 'damage'. The prairie seemed to be doing a great job of supporting the buffalo AND sustaining itself and it's ecosystem without any real trouble. A buffalo 'wallow' can actually help the ecosystem, especially in arid climates.

Mother Nature certainly isn't all positive and no negative, but it does tend to take care of itself as a whole because itself is it's top priority. For most ranchers, cattle are their top priority, not the ecosystem and in my opinion, it shows. Just the money and resources they spend getting rid of antelope, coyote, foxes, prairie dogs, and rabbits off their land (because some species threaten the cattle and their grazing and because others are out of control thanks to a lack of natural predators) alone shows where their priorities are and also shows that the issue goes a lot deeper than just how the land looks aesthetically.

Share this post


Link to post

Mother Nature certainly isn't all positive and no negative, but it does tend to take care of itself as a whole because itself is it's top priority. For most ranchers, cattle are their top priority, not the ecosystem and in my opinion, it shows. Just the money and resources they spend getting rid of antelope, coyote, foxes, prairie dogs, and rabbits off their land (because some species threaten the cattle and their grazing and because others are out of control thanks to a lack of natural predators) alone shows where their priorities are and also shows that the issue goes a lot deeper than just how the land looks aesthetically.

I believe you are correct. I also believe that man is part of nature and as soon as we learn how to produce food and sustenance from other resources that Mother Nature will take care of any damage that man has caused and something else will come along to make it's mark in the landscape.

Share this post


Link to post
We have agreed to follow the laws that we make collectively.

...

We the people agree to be governed.

Oh? Where and how?

I did not "agree to be governed". The only agreement I know of was forced down my throat by a government that has more guns, bigger guns, and better guns than I can possibly hope to acquire. (And a much greater willingness to use them, I should add.)

When, as has happened the world around, armed men in fancy hats with shiny badges come knocking on your door and demand that you give them your food storage, did you agree to that? When the state confiscates your 401k and IRA (as it surely will—they're talking about that right now in the hallowed halls of the White House and in Congress), did you agree to that?

What is the alternative to this agreement? One cannot in reality agree to someting when there is, literally, only one option.

George Washington was right: Government is like fire: a dangerous servant and a fearsome master.

Lehi

Share this post


Link to post

Lehi:

I have never saaid that tyou or anyone else has to like anything the government does but that you were a member of the military is prima facia evidence of your agreement. That you pay taxes is prima facia evidence of your agrement. That you remain in this ountry is prima facia evidence of your agreement.

Share this post


Link to post
I have never saaid that tyou or anyone else has to like anything the government does but that you were a member of the military is prima facia evidence of your agreement. That you pay taxes is prima facia evidence of your agrement. That you remain in this ountry is prima facia evidence of your agreement.

That I pay taxes is prima facia evidence that the government has bigger guns, better guns, and more guns than I do.

That I remain in this country is evidence that there is no place to go.

That I was in the military is evidence that I wanted (and do still) to make the place better, not that I agreed to live under a corrupt and evil system of the systematic denial of unalieanable rights.

Lehi

Share this post


Link to post

Lehi:

We'll just have to agree to disagree here. I pay my taxes because I want and need the goods and services they help provide. I like schools, libraries, parks, roads, and highways. I like the idea of paying my taxes so that some poor children can have a warm bed to sleep at night, with good food in their bellies.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm with TSS.

(Just so you don't feel oh-so-alone, TSS.)

Share this post


Link to post
We'll just have to agree to disagree here. I pay my taxes because I want and need the goods and services they help provide.

With a few important exceptions, I do not want them, and I do not need them. So I do not like to pay their taxes. Believe me, if they were my taxes, the number would be $0.

I like schools, libraries, parks, ...

I do, too, but I do not like government schools, parks, and libraries. Government involvement in these is pernicious and destructive.

... roads, and highways.

We pay for these through a user fee (which is great!). We pay at the pump directly, and indirectly when we buy things that use the road network.. Of course, the Highway "Trust Funds" these monies go into get robbed (just like antiSocisal inSecurity Trust Funds) for other things that give politicians more power. I believe a private road system would work better than the government one we have, but I can live with it as it is (provided they'd fix the pothole outside my front door). The same with fire departments and police forces; even a justice system run by competing private enterprises would be faster, fairer, and more affordable.

I like the idea of paying my taxes so that some poor children can have a warm bed to sleep at night, with good food in their bellies.

There are vastly more effective ways of making these good things happen.

It gets more than a little tiresome hearing people (even implicitly) charge that those of us who object to coercive taxation (pardon the redundancy) are misers, cruel, and egomaniacial.

We want the same results you do, but we want to be personally involved, rather than abdicate the responsibility to the man with the gun, the shiny badge, and the fancy hat.

Lehi

Share this post


Link to post

Mars:

Thanx, but I don't feel alone when talking to Lehi. Even when we occassionally don't agree. :) At the end of the day I still believe he is a friend; albeit an internet one. :) :)

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...