Focus

Emo people have nothing to do with real emo music. They listen MCR and Fall Out Boy. Or they listen to repulsive bands like Alesana or Underoath. Real emo is much more related to the hardcore punk subculture. Most of the lyrics are about stupid socialist political rants anyways, not about cutting yourself. It would be stupid and collectivist-like to not like a certain music because of the way the media generally perceives it. Also lyrics =/= music so to not like music because of the lyrics is really dumb.

Cap'n Jazz You know, I would have thought that on a forum that advocates individualism and reason, people would advocate individualism and reason when it comes to musical stereotypes. Your's has been proven wrong and if you even bothered to listen to the songs I posted, you would notice why. There really is no difference between hardcore and most emo because emo is really just a term for hardcore influenced by DC Hardcore.

Do you listen to any Husker Du? Zen Arcade is probably on my list of my top ten albums.

Does anyone here listen to any real hardcore? When I mean real hardcore I mean the stuff that is actually hardcore and not what most people would describe to be emo, post-hardcore, etc. Not Emo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWHf_vYZzQ8...feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5nw1-_5-Vk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kkbTNmg40c Real Hardcore: Post-Hardcore Emo http://www.myspace.com/streetsmartcyclist Screamo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPx5HkCZDzY (not-so-good quality)

He thinks we have a choice to pay taxes because if you buy property on "government soil" then you have agreed to pay taxes. He basically says we put ourselves in the situation to pay taxes. He compares it to buying into a housing development with rules and regulations such as not buying pets and stuff like that. How is this different?

The thing is, if I buy property that I know will allow the government to tax me, isn't it just as voluntary as a transaction between a business man and the consumer?

What if taxes only paid for the police force, courts, etc, but are still not "voluntary?" There has to be a better argument against taxes then, "Most of the services I pay for, I don't use."

So lately I have been getting into debates with people on why taxes are wrong. I use the basic arguments such as taxes being coercive force, etc, etc. Then my opponent responds that taxes are not voluntary because I can just leave if I do not like taxes. I then state that the choice itself is coercive, but they say that I voluntarily accepted to pay taxes when I bought property in this country. So then they compare the voluntary exchanges between a business and consumer to a citizen and government and say that they are the same. How exactly are they different? I am using the services of the government when I live in the country, aren't I?

Objectivists would prefer a president who made rational judgment. If he is religious, then his judgments probably aren't going to be that rational unless he pushes religion away to the side. They made arguments saying that the constitutional party is still very religious, and he will probably support religious legislation, which is immoral.