3 ms·

> this is the community that you have chosen to be a part of and are in control of Not everyone in the US lives in some 100 person small town "community". In

by stale2002 6y ago

> this is the community that you have chosen to be a part of and are in control of Not everyone in the US lives in some 100 person small town "community". Instead, many people live in cities that have hundreds of thousands of people in it. > That is what "rejecting society" entails. You would not still blindly support that person. People absolutely still continue to support family members, all the time, even when they do "bad" things. It is extremely common. People care a lot about family. Yes, many people would absolutely still support them. I absolutely would continue to support them, as would many others. And there is nothing that you could do to stop me from helping them, unless you are going to do something very impractical, like exile everyone who supports their friends and family as well. > These people chose not to have access to food. Doesn't matter. There would still be people who disagree with you, and would consider them to be disadvantaged, regardless of your opinion on the matter. > they can't stay in the community if they won't be a member of it. Of course they could still be in the community. They could still be in the community if they have friends and family who would be willing to support them. Which there definitely could be! People such as myself would absolutely continue to support my friends and family, even if they did this. > Yes, some people will disagree. They can build their own society and we can coexist. Or, they can continue to live in the same place as you do, and continue to support individuals who "reject" society. > . Similarly, the punishment for someone harboring such an individual isn't my decision, it's something the community decides based on the circumstances. Ok, and I am saying that people attempting to enforce punishment on every individual who harbors a friend or family member is going to be extremely impractical. There are numerous motivations and reasons for someone to "harbor" others, and this "society" that you are talking about would require a near unanimous agreement on everything, which just isnt going to happen. Instead, there would be a sizeable minority of people, who would continue to work with their friends and family. Why? Because thats what happens all of the time, in real life. People, all the time, continue to support their friends and family, even when they have done bad things.

boomboomsubban 6y ago
>Not everyone in the US lives in some 100 person small town "community". Instead, many people live in cities that have hundreds of thousands of people in it. Which can be broken down into numerous communities living together. >People absolutely still continue to support family members, all the time, even when they do "bad" things This isn't someone doing a "bad" thing, this is someone of full mind willfully saying they want nothing to do with the family. You think they'd still force their aid on them? >And there is nothing that you could do to stop me from helping them, unless you are going to do something very impractical, like exile everyone who supports their friends and family as well. You seem to still be under the impression that "I" am forcing my will. Decisions are made by the community, that these people are a part of. I'm not forcing people to sell out their friends, their friends are the ones rejecting their help. Your idea that people would still unquestionably offer help to people who have stated they do not want it and will not return it is just silly. If that happened in modern society, we would assume mental illness and barring that cut ties for at least some time. All of your arguments resolve around someone committing some bad deed, and some faceless authority issues punishment on them. That is so far removed from what is happening, I don't know how to continue this conversation.
- stale2002 6y ago
  > Which can be broken down into numerous communities living together. Lol, so now you are talking about ending the concept of cities? This is getting even more implausible. > I'm not forcing people to sell out their friends, their friends are the ones rejecting their help If no one is going to force people to sell out there friends then you need to understand that a lot of people would simply continue to provide support to them. > Your idea that people would still unquestionably offer help I am not saying everyone would. Instead, I am saying some people would. And some is enough. People absolutely can care a lot about their friends, family, and children, enough so as to provide unconditional support. This happens all the time, in real life! > that cut ties for at least some time. Lots of people, right now, do not cut ties with family members, who do aweful things. > willfully saying they want nothing to do with the family. You think they'd still force their aid on them? I am telling you, that I would help any of my close friends or family, personally, for sure, as would many people I know, and you can't convince me otherwise to not help them. This already happens, right now, in the real world! I think that some people care a whole lot about their friends and family, and no argument that you make overrules this. People, right now, provide massive amounts of unconditional support to many of their friends. I absolutely would do that, for example, regardless of the arguments that are being made. IE, I know many people that would never ever abandon their family, because they "rejected society", and that there is zero argument that people could make to convince them otherwise, because family matters to them.
  - boomboomsubban 6y ago
    >Lol, so now you are talking about ending the concept of cities? This is getting even more implausible. No, I am not. I am discussing furthering what already happens, where cities break down into smaller sections. >am telling you, that I would help any of my close friends or family, personally, for sure, as would many people I know, and you can't convince me otherwise to not help them I am not trying to convince you, your friend said they don't want your help. If you continue trying to force it on them, you are an asshole. >Lots of people, right now, do not cut ties with family members, who do aweful things. Nobody has done an "awful thing". I'm done explaining this. You keep making the same statements that don't even reference what I have said. I understand that friends and family are willing to stand by when their loved one does something bad. I also have friends and family. That is not analogous to what is being discussed. A closer example would be a family having an argument about where to celebrate Christmas, until finally someone breaks off and holds their own celebration.

boomboomsubban 6y ago

>Not everyone in the US lives in some 100 person small town "community". Instead, many people live in cities that have hundreds of thousands of people in it. Which can be broken down into numerous communities living together. >People absolutely still continue to support family members, all the time, even when they do "bad" things This isn't someone doing a "bad" thing, this is someone of full mind willfully saying they want nothing to do with the family. You think they'd still force their aid on them? >And there is nothing that you could do to stop me from helping them, unless you are going to do something very impractical, like exile everyone who supports their friends and family as well. You seem to still be under the impression that "I" am forcing my will. Decisions are made by the community, that these people are a part of. I'm not forcing people to sell out their friends, their friends are the ones rejecting their help. Your idea that people would still unquestionably offer help to people who have stated they do not want it and will not return it is just silly. If that happened in modern society, we would assume mental illness and barring that cut ties for at least some time. All of your arguments resolve around someone committing some bad deed, and some faceless authority issues punishment on them. That is so far removed from what is happening, I don't know how to continue this conversation.

stale2002 6y ago
> Which can be broken down into numerous communities living together. Lol, so now you are talking about ending the concept of cities? This is getting even more implausible. > I'm not forcing people to sell out their friends, their friends are the ones rejecting their help If no one is going to force people to sell out there friends then you need to understand that a lot of people would simply continue to provide support to them. > Your idea that people would still unquestionably offer help I am not saying everyone would. Instead, I am saying some people would. And some is enough. People absolutely can care a lot about their friends, family, and children, enough so as to provide unconditional support. This happens all the time, in real life! > that cut ties for at least some time. Lots of people, right now, do not cut ties with family members, who do aweful things. > willfully saying they want nothing to do with the family. You think they'd still force their aid on them? I am telling you, that I would help any of my close friends or family, personally, for sure, as would many people I know, and you can't convince me otherwise to not help them. This already happens, right now, in the real world! I think that some people care a whole lot about their friends and family, and no argument that you make overrules this. People, right now, provide massive amounts of unconditional support to many of their friends. I absolutely would do that, for example, regardless of the arguments that are being made. IE, I know many people that would never ever abandon their family, because they "rejected society", and that there is zero argument that people could make to convince them otherwise, because family matters to them.
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  >Lol, so now you are talking about ending the concept of cities? This is getting even more implausible. No, I am not. I am discussing furthering what already happens, where cities break down into smaller sections. >am telling you, that I would help any of my close friends or family, personally, for sure, as would many people I know, and you can't convince me otherwise to not help them I am not trying to convince you, your friend said they don't want your help. If you continue trying to force it on them, you are an asshole. >Lots of people, right now, do not cut ties with family members, who do aweful things. Nobody has done an "awful thing". I'm done explaining this. You keep making the same statements that don't even reference what I have said. I understand that friends and family are willing to stand by when their loved one does something bad. I also have friends and family. That is not analogous to what is being discussed. A closer example would be a family having an argument about where to celebrate Christmas, until finally someone breaks off and holds their own celebration.