While I am devoutly liberal, I have to say that the answer to this is "no, not at all".

I will concede that most entrepreneurs become very greedy when successful and start making poor ethical decisions, but, the word just means "one who employs productive labor".

How then, would I be greedy, if I invested what little money I had into creating a shop that makes signs for people, if making signs was something that I really enjoyed doing, and I hired several others who were also good at making signs, and I pay everyone a fair amount, including profit sharing, and we all work to expand our business?

Operating a business can be done in a non-greedy way and still be very profitable. If I make too much money, maybe I donate it or specifically use it to hire a new worker, or buy more machines to make better products with?

I know that most people don't do this, but there are some.

Numbers 5:11-5:31 describes a method of abortion used by priests in the Old World.

In the book, it is condoned by the word of God, that if a man is overcome with jealousy, even with no evidence whatsoever, and believes that his wife has slept with another man, that the priest should give her "bitter water" that causes miscarriage.

This is the end of the Christian anti-abortion argument, because also, it is spoken in the SAME BIBLE that you support, that if a man and woman fight, and a miscarriage is caused, then the husband of the woman may charge a fee to the other person for the miscarriage. The punishment IS NOT the same as the one for MURDER.

So there ya go, two separate parts of the bible saying "abortion is not murder" and "abortion is okay"... So think about that before you go out and hold up signs.

Of course. It's a movement that affected millions of Americans and still has motion in the current age. There are tons of movies and other media created relating to this information, and it should be shown, at least in part, to people who are learning about modern history.

Should it be over-emphasized? No.

This is the simplest and most perfect response to this question. Thank you VoxNihili.

You are trying to form a linkage between Nationalism and some kind of "good" defense of one's country.

If your country is evil, and it is being conquered by good, ought you defend it?

The Nationalists amongst you would say yes, and take up arms against good men and women. The good people amongst you would say no.

If your country is good, all good people will raise up and fight for it, regardless of how blindly nationalistic they are.

Nationalism is simply blind support of your country no matter what the circumstance... and blind obedience and support is inhuman, foolish, and will ultimately lend you to being controlled by a person with a powerful will... since you have none if you are indeed a Nationalist.

The State should have real control and solid power, but the people should be able to replace it at will. This is the logical position to allow for central management of resources and crisis, but to keep the ability to strip that power of management out of the hands of those who would abuse it. Nationalists fight to keep the power in the wrong hands JUST AS HARD as they fight to keep it in the right hands. Others only fight for the correct side.

No, Nationalism, and any sense of pride for where you come from is a foolish, emotional condition.

You should be logical in your decision to support or dissent against your country. If your country makes an evil or bad decision, you should vote against it, and if it is wicked enough, revolt.

Nationalism causes people to view anything different from their country's way of doing things as a bad thing... for instance, since the USA hasn't had public health care, and other countries do, the "nationalists" are automatically against change, even when it is logical.

Here's a quick tip:

Your country isn't the best one on the Earth, and neither is mine. There isn't a best country, because for every country you can claim is best, I can devise a meaningful measure by which it isn't.

Are there some countries worse than others in almost every way? Sure. Not everything is equal... but it's more important to be logical and compassionate (which are not mutually exclusive) than it is to be Nationalistic.

Your country won't even be remotely the same place in 50 years, anyway, so, honestly, you're just cheering for something temporary. In 50 years, you'll be sitting around saying "man, this place sure went to hell in a handbasket" like countless old men do every day and always have throughout the ages... because they used to be little Nationalistic fools.

Progressives don't become that same old man. They grow old and smile at the winds of change and what the future will bring as people become more intelligent, educated, and socially aware.

Though I forgive the ignorance of my past countrymen, the correct answer is no.

The majority of the casualties were obviously civilian. This would never have flown in the modern age. People have realized that it is wrong to take such actions.

Finally, by any given justification that you can make, the enemies of the United States (of that time or current), can justify dropping a nuke on an American city... and if that rests well with you, maybe you deserve to watch your family, friends, and children evaporate in nuclear fire or slowly die of radiation.

This, because people forget that police officers and judges and other people in the system who would have access to this kind of information are also human beings just doing a job.

They are not all good people, and even amongst the good ones there are many of them who are prone to making errors. See the recent event of a police officer shooting a biker in the spine because he reached for his wallet.

Do you want a situation where you miss a job opportunity because the boss at the corporation had his police buddy pull your file, and found a facebook connection between you and the guy that raped his daughter, even though you don't still talk to that guy or weren't even good friends with him?

That's the kind of sideline stuff that will be enabled by this technology, and while you may think you have nothing to hide, the chip will NOT protect you against other people's stupid suspicions, ideas, and prejudices... and there are more than you could ever possibly imagine that would affect you, it's just that right now you aren't victimized by them because nobody knows everything about you.

How about being fired because your crazy liberal boss pulls a file and finds out you vote conservative?

How about the cop that lets everyone who is a conservative go but max fines every liberal he comes across?

What about when the government decides that it's illegal to be a member of the Libertarian or Communist parties, and decides to lock up everyone who is?

There are a billion bad things that could come of this, and very few good.

Finally, criminals who intended to murder someone or steal something would likely figure out a way to block the signal from their chip during the crime in progress, or remove it entirely and put it back in... this would then serve to give them an alibi... "See, my chip is working, but Wal-Mart has no record of my entering the store, thus, I am free"... it's a common technological conundrum that IT forensics teams have to deal with, the lack of a trail becomes evidence of innocence, EVEN in situations where the trail can be deleted with a keypress.

It is still cleaner and more healthy to have it done...

And also, circumcised men who are deeply upset with their parent's decision and are trying to undo it are just trying to bring attention to their penis. It's essentially a fetish. Look it up.

Yes, by definition, as per this debate, Taxation is not theft, it is Taxation. When you are stolen from, you do NOT get anything in return. There's a gulf of difference that you don't seem to be able to grasp for some reason.

As per your purse example, if they are ALLOWING me to take their purse, and I am providing a service in exchange for continued allowance, then I am NOT stealing their purse anymore.

As per your "crazy general store" owner example, all I can say is, "What?" ... do you actually read what you type on here?

If you don't want to pay taxes, DON'T EARN MONEY and DON'T OWN PROPERTY in this country. That's how you get out of it. Move to another country that doesn't charge taxes for anything (protip: there's not one). Or you could be homeless, or earn so little income that you can afford to rent a crappy house and pay for food and that's it, and you won't be paying taxes under current US law. Actually, other people's taxes will likely pay for quite a large portion of your food.

The US Government has never forced me to do anything. "Paying Taxes" is a CONDITIONAL CONTRACT between law abiding citizens and the government. When you pick up that piece of currency and put it into your pocket, you are acknowledging the powers that be... otherwise, LEAVE THE DOLLAR ALONE.

Again, tax avoidance:

1) Earn so little you pay no tax.

2) Move to another country.

3) Join a religious order and live life at a monastery or commune.

4) Become homeless.

You don't like those things? Everything else that exists here was built by a MAJORITY that agree that pitching in your share of the tax burden is expected, and reasonable. You don't think it's expected and reasonable? Don't use the roads we pay for, don't use the schools we pay for, etc.