Arnold Schwarzenegger says f... your freedom!

[SPIRIT]

[HisWrathSoon]

Another satanist.

[HVDC]

Arnold comes from an interesting family. I wonder how he was able to immigrate to the United States?

Sir H

[Fred]

Arnold comes from an interesting family. I wonder how he was able to immigrate to the United States?

Sir H

Considering his high moral character, he doesn't even come close to a list of people whose opinion I care about.

[Sasquatch]

Very disappointing, since his fame and career depended on the freedom and opportunity he enjoyed by immigrating to the U.S.

[Subcomandante]

The concept which Mr. Schwarzenegger comes from here, is the idea that with freedom comes personal obligation and responsibility. Not very different from Elder Oaks' and Elder Rasband's interpretation of this exact same idea.

Many people understand rights as being connected with responsibilities and obligations.

Even others that argue for a more individualistic take on rights, would argue that one's rights end when another's rights are affected by you exercising your rights.

[Benjamin_LK]

The concept which Mr. Schwarzenegger comes from here, is the idea that with freedom comes personal obligation and responsibility. Not very different from Elder Oaks' and Elder Rasband's interpretation of this exact same idea.

Many people understand rights as being connected with responsibilities and obligations.

Even others that argue for a more individualistic take on rights, would argue that one's rights end when another's rights are affected by you exercising your rights.

So if I decide when I have cancer to force myself uninvited into someone else’s house, whose rights are being violated? I’m pretty sure it’s the person whose house I forced myself into uninvited who is violated, not my medical rights to health.

[TrueFaith]

The concept which Mr. Schwarzenegger comes from here, is the idea that with freedom comes personal obligation and responsibility. Not very different from Elder Oaks' and Elder Rasband's interpretation of this exact same idea.

Many people understand rights as being connected with responsibilities and obligations.

Even others that argue for a more individualistic take on rights, would argue that one's rights end when another's rights are affected by you exercising your rights.

"Freedom comes from personal obligation".

That statement contradicts itself. Freedom is the absence of obligation. Freedom is an inalienable right that comes from God. No man has the moral authority to arbitrarily restrict it or put requirement on it as Arnold Schwarzenegger did.

I only have the right to protect myself. I don't have any right to force someone else to protect me. When I drive through an intersection, I am responsible only for my own safety. If someone else chooses to run a red light, I must be prepared to be vigilant and drive defensively to prevent an accident. I cannot force that person to drive the way I want them to drive.

Seatbelts are immoral, so are airport and security scans. They break natural rights of human beings. Everyone should be able to choose.

If someone comes to work sick, I must take my own precautions to protect myself. I am morally and legally unjustified in forcing someone else to behave a certain way.

I can petition a just government to establish law to restrict the liberty of others as long as those individuals have been tried and convicted of a crime through judge and jury. That is how it is done.

Shaming, mandating, pushing requirements, etc, outside of a legal framework is immoral. You need a good reason and a warrant to search someone and a jury conviction to restrict liberty. Period.

That is the highest LAW of the United States under the Constitution.

[Durzan]

The concept which Mr. Schwarzenegger comes from here, is the idea that with freedom comes personal obligation and responsibility. Not very different from Elder Oaks' and Elder Rasband's interpretation of this exact same idea.

Many people understand rights as being connected with responsibilities and obligations.

Even others that argue for a more individualistic take on rights, would argue that one's rights end when another's rights are affected by you exercising your rights.

"Freedom comes from personal obligation".

That statement contradicts itself. Freedom is the absence of obligation. Freedom is an inalienable right that comes from God. No man has the moral authority to arbitrarily restrict it or put requirement on it as Arnold Schwarzenegger did.

I only have the right to protect myself. I don't have any right to force someone else to protect me. When I drive through an intersection, I am responsible only for my own safety. If someone else chooses to run a red light, I must be prepared to be vigilant and drive defensively to prevent an accident. I cannot force that person to drive the way I want them to drive.

Seatbelts are immoral, so are airport and security scans. They break natural rights of human beings. Everyone should be able to choose.

If someone comes to work sick, I must take my own precautions to protect myself. I am morally and legally unjustified in forcing someone else to behave a certain way.

I can petition a just government to establish law to restrict the liberty of others as long as those individuals have been tried and convicted of a crime through judge and jury. That is how it is done.

Shaming, mandating, pushing requirements, etc, outside of a legal framework is immoral. You need a good reason and a warrant to search someone and a jury conviction to restrict liberty. Period.

That is the highest LAW of the United States under the Constitution.

Imma gonna steal that. This is just too good not to. Yoink!

[InfoWarrior82]

The concept which Mr. Schwarzenegger comes from here, is the idea that with freedom comes personal obligation and responsibility. Not very different from Elder Oaks' and Elder Rasband's interpretation of this exact same idea.

Many people understand rights as being connected with responsibilities and obligations.

Even others that argue for a more individualistic take on rights, would argue that one's rights end when another's rights are affected by you exercising your rights.

Except that's not what this is. This is guilty until proven innocent. Antithetical to any free society.

[JK4Woods]

The concept which Mr. Schwarzenegger comes from here, is the idea that with freedom comes personal obligation and responsibility. Not very different from Elder Oaks' and Elder Rasband's interpretation of this exact same idea.

Many people understand rights as being connected with responsibilities and obligations.

Even others that argue for a more individualistic take on rights, would argue that one's rights end when another's rights are affected by you exercising your rights.

Except that's not what this is. This is guilty until proven innocent. Antithetical to any free society.

“Antithetical to any free society”.

Not sure I agree.
Spain and other European countries have a “guilty until proven innocent” bent to their body of laws.

I believe many countries around the world who are considered “free” are predominantly “guilty until proven innocent”.

Scary thought.... but does result in less accusation and false charges.

It all stems from which hereditary law system the nations’ laws descend from. English law is where US law comes from. Other countries around the world descend from Roman law roots.

Other countries descend from internal historical laws unique for their circumstance.

Check out “Locked up Abroad” a TV show which will make anyone think twice about straying from the straight and narrow.

[markharr]

In some ways, this whole Covid thing was a blessing because we are finding out who is really on the side of liberty and who is on the side of tyranny.

[libertasbella]

In some ways, this whole Covid thing was a blessing because we are finding out who is really on the side of liberty and who is on the side of tyranny.

Who would have guessed every celebrity would be on the side of tyranny with the exception of James Woods, Ted Nugent and the cast of Duck Dynasty?

[Niemand]

In some ways, this whole Covid thing was a blessing because we are finding out who is really on the side of liberty and who is on the side of tyranny.

In some ways, but some people are coming out with the wrong things for the right reasons. It is just a matter how far they will bend.

I see this as a massive version of the Milgram Experiment... how cruel are you prepared to be?

The real test is whether the solutions are worse than the problem. Some of the recent ones have been.

[HVDC]

In some ways, this whole Covid thing was a blessing because we are finding out who is really on the side of liberty and who is on the side of tyranny.

Who would have guessed every celebrity would be on the side of tyranny with the exception of James Woods, Ted Nugent and the cast of Duck Dynasty?

"The more you know..."

https://www.themoreyouknow.com/

Sir H

[darknesstolight]

The concept which Mr. Schwarzenegger comes from here, is the idea that with freedom comes personal obligation and responsibility. Not very different from Elder Oaks' and Elder Rasband's interpretation of this exact same idea.

Many people understand rights as being connected with responsibilities and obligations.

Even others that argue for a more individualistic take on rights, would argue that one's rights end when another's rights are affected by you exercising your rights.

No we don't recognize that.

We recognize that our sovereignty ends where another person's sovereignty begins.

We can't violate another person's sovereignty. We can affect other's rights and sovereignty without issue. Affecting a person and violation of sovereignty are two different things.

You can't force me to take a vaccine just because you might be affected by it.

You have to prove, show, demonstrate how my actions violated your sovereignty not just say you might get hurt if I don't take a vaccine or wear a mask.

One man can't make another man inject a substance in to his body if they don't want it just because there is a serious flu like virus infecting people and the shot is supposed to make it go away.

There are so many good and rational reasons to be skeptical of the push for this vaccine but the most important one right now, before it gets worse, is protecting our liberty and freedom.

If we give it away for covid and the vax we will not get it back easily if ever.

...

[darknesstolight]

No data shows masks makes the virus go away.

We got the vax but it wasn't enough. They need more money.

99-94% survival rate.

Are you really ready to surrender your liberty and freedom for this virus and for a vaccine that was created in record time, tested in record time, has NO LONG TERM TEST, and is a completely new unvetted vaccine technology?

If you choose to take the vaccine then you choose that but what good reason do you have to violate my rights?

If you and I were in a room how would you justify forcing me and then administering to me the vaccine? Or are you like a coward gonna ask another man to do it?

...

[Niemand]

The boundaries of personal freedom are sketchy, but to give you another example, I have had issues with noisy neighbours in the past who get blind drunk and hold loud parties/karaoke at all hours. I have never tried to force them to stop drinking but if they deprive me of my right to some peace at night then that is a violation. (I can tolerate it occasionally but not when I need to get up early.)

One of the few good things about this mess is that I used to get people coughing all over me on public transport, often a few feet away from my face and with no effort to cover their mouths. I really don't miss that. I remember one man had a really vile cough and I complained to him - he thought he was doing nothing wrong and then within a week or two I got the flu (almost certainly from him.)

I think that is an issue of basic hygiene. Covid regs have improved that in some cases, it's just the rest I can't stand.

[Sunain]

In some ways, this whole Covid thing was a blessing because we are finding out who is really on the side of liberty and who is on the side of tyranny.

Indeed. He and others that say freedom is bad is really sifting who aligns with Satan's plan. Freedom is the Lord's plan.

Arnold sounds like a Nazi...

[markharr]

If you think about it, acting is professional deception. No sure why anyone would want to take advice from someone who has risen so far up the ranks of the art of deception. How do you even know if it's his real personal opinion or something he was paid to say?

[darknesstolight]

The boundaries of personal freedom are sketchy, but to give you another example, I have had issues with noisy neighbours in the past who get blind drunk and hold loud parties/karaoke at all hours. I have never tried to force them to stop drinking but if they deprive me of my right to some peace at night then that is a violation. (I can tolerate it occasionally but not when I need to get up early.)

One of the few good things about this mess is that I used to get people coughing all over me on public transport, often a few feet away from my face and with no effort to cover their mouths. I really don't miss that. I remember one man had a really vile cough and I complained to him - he thought he was doing nothing wrong and then within a week or two I got the flu (almost certainly from him.)

I think that is an issue of basic hygiene. Covid regs have improved that in some cases, it's just the rest I can't stand.

You have no idea what you are saying.

You sound like a spoiled kid.

Our ancestors brought us here successfully literally living in dirt, mud, blood, and trash. They had strong immunity against viruses and bacteria.

Maybe your tolerance to being bothered is too low

Come try and force me and you will find out how "sketchy" the boundaries of my personal freedom are. But I'm thinking your the type who goes and gets another man to take care of your issues.

...

[HVDC]

In some ways, this whole Covid thing was a blessing because we are finding out who is really on the side of liberty and who is on the side of tyranny.

Indeed. He and others that say freedom is bad is really sifting who aligns with Satan's plan. Freedom is the Lord's plan.

Arnold sounds like a Nazi...

A stereotypical Hollywood NAZI indeed.

And then there is this:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustav_Schwarzenegger

His father was a Nazi, just like almost everyone else at that time, in those countries. But apparently not a stereotypical Hollywood one

Sir H

[Niemand]

If you think about it, acting is professional deception. No sure why anyone would want to take advice from someone who has risen so far up the ranks of the art of deception. How do you even know if it's his real personal opinion or something he was paid to say?

Yes, but that depends on whether you consider Arnie an actor. I've enjoyed some of his films in the past (which I'm embarrassed to admit), but the man's not known for his range or line delivery (he could barely speak English at one point.)

But with other actors that definitely applies. They're paid to be someone else, played to screw around (literally) and play characters they don't like.

[Niemand]

In some ways, this whole Covid thing was a blessing because we are finding out who is really on the side of liberty and who is on the side of tyranny.

Indeed. He and others that say freedom is bad is really sifting who aligns with Satan's plan. Freedom is the Lord's plan.

Arnold sounds like a Nazi...

A stereotypical Hollywood NAZI indeed.

And then there is this:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustav_Schwarzenegger

His father was a Nazi, just like almost everyone else at that time, in those countries. But apparently not a stereotypical Hollywood one

Sir H

His father sounds from that link like he made an opportunistic career move, not an ideological one... maybe a bit like his son has.

Schwarzenegger voluntarily applied to join the Austrian National Socialist Party on 1 March 1938, eleven days before the country was annexed. Austria became part of Nazi Germany after being annexed on 12 March 1938.[2] A separate record obtained by the Wiesenthal Center indicates he sought membership before the annexation, but was only accepted in January 1941.

However, I'm not going to condemn Arnie for what his father did. I'm going to condemn Arnie for what Arnie does.

[markharr]

If you think about it, acting is professional deception. No sure why anyone would want to take advice from someone who has risen so far up the ranks of the art of deception. How do you even know if it's his real personal opinion or something he was paid to say?

Yes, but that depends on whether you consider Arnie an actor. I've enjoyed some of his films in the past (which I'm embarrassed to admit), but the man's not known for his range or line delivery (he could barely speak English at one point.)

But with other actors that definitely applies. They're paid to be someone else, played to screw around (literally) and play characters they don't like.

Some faiths believe that Lucifer was the Angel of music and the arts before his fall.