Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'The War Room' started by TidWell, Apr 15, 2018.
Defense yes, but what USA has its complete offense.
There is no way he could possibly win because it is literally the opposite of a Representative democracy. Literally nobody would pay taxes because the government does something that everyone dislikes.
You're giving libertarianism a bad name by advocating a government while still pretending to believe in the philosophy.
Do you know anyone that doesn't want a service that helps defend them? Most everyone just wants to pull security themselves?
Honestly, anyone who tolerates this, whether based on abortion or on leftist causes like war protest or opposition to the death pentalty, etc., is too stupid to deserve to live in a civil society with functioning government.
This is idiotic. This reasoning can be imputed ad infinitum and making having a society impossible.
What if you're against foreign intervention?
Against tax breaks for churches?
Against the death penalty?
Against affirmative action?
Against public funding for faith-based services?
Against public funding for drug rehab?
Against green energy infrastructure?
Every single fucking citizen could say "I'm not paying taxes, because I'm morally opposed to XYZ."
If only he had a good alibi.
I always wondered where all that defense money went to even when I was in. Seemed like we never saw any of it.
you legally cant speed in a vehicle either.
The opinions you express do not leave you any room to be wrong, which is also the arrogance of absolute certainty. Sounds like you have no idea what I’m talking about. Let’s just say you’re setting yourself up for perpetual failure.
My point had nothing to do with that fact. I thought that was pretty cut and dry.
You're fundmentally misreading your article. The judge ruled on felony tax evasion. Meaning, the defendant didn't knowingly (with his wacky religious poli-sci beliefs) attempt to evade taxes.
It does not mean that you can object to paying taxes on religious grounds. You can't, and that has plenty of SC precedent.
Cant tell if serious Sidious.
I never made a comment. I am not the author of the article.
This was the title of the article not mine I just put Man instead of He
He refuses to pay taxes because he opposes abortions. He just beat the feds in court
Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/nation-world/national/article208905159.html#storylink=cpy
They're really not, though. At least most of them. That would be anarcho-capitalists, who are every bit as stupid and unprincipled, but generally have at least some half-baked ideological underpinnings or one-sided analyses at their disposal.
This would be like saying that a person got out of a DUI because they hate trump, when in actuality they passed a breathalyzer. His moronic ideas to excuse tax evasion had nothing to do with the fact that his conduct in cashing checks wasnt criminal. Hes still going to pay one way or another.
Well no more use of public roads, utilities or institutions for that dumbass.
If only there was a way to cut him off from all taxpayer funded stuff. He's being cheap and letting everyone else subsidize shit he benefits from. Let him go live in North Korea or Russia.
FFS, people need to learn about the Hyde Amendment before arguing that their tax dollars go towards abortions. They don't except in cases of rape, incest, or the woman's life is at risk.
Hell of a precedent if it establishes one and holds. I'd get out of taxes via "I don't support the bombing of Syria with missiles bought with taxpayer money" at the moment
defense is a necessity. what about offense?