On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 18:57:17 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:

On 12/31/2009 6:28 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 16:05:48 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:

On 12/31/2009 3:52 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 14:53:06 -0600, Tim Daneliuk
wrote:

On 12/31/2009 12:10 PM, Neil Brooks wrote:
SNIP

It is
you that defend force - the force of the collective against
the individual. I do not wish to take anything for you
or anyone else. I'm merely resisting the idea that you and your
collective should be able to pillage what is mine.

You describe Social Darwinism -- no less. Survival of the fittest.
Law of the jungle. I've elaborated on it for you, so ... what I mean
should be clear.

It is astonishing to me that someone of evident intellectual
abilities could be so intentionally obtuse. I am opposed
to *forced wealth redistribution by means of government*.

No. You just object in government forcing it to being redistributed in
a new direction that is slightly more equitible.


You are utterly wrong. I don't support wealth redistribution whether
it is for lazy drug addicts or corporate CEOs.

You are utterly wrong.


Do you know my wife?

LOL - I doubt that she would appreciate your response to that one :-)