Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!!

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: epicure who wrote (76900)	4/5/2000 3:54:00 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) of 108807

<<if you want to define that as good or moral, go right ahead, but I can't possibly agree with you.>> The foundation of jurisprudence in most societies can find its seed in some definition of what "being" is when referencing "human beings." That is, such and such is what human beings are made of and how they operate. The laws therefore come along to support the operation of human beings as they are meant to operate with out interference. If I operate best by breathing from the atmosphere then I ought to be able to do that without interference from other creatures, thus it is right for me to breath and the law should protect that practice as a "right." Any law supporting that practice is therefore good and moral. A law in and of itself can be judged by us as individuals as a bad and immoral law. For example if we consider smoking cigarettes and try to legislate the practice, the smokers are going to cry that you are interfering with their right to consume as they choose and nonsmokers are going to cry that you are interferring with their right to breath the atmosphere unrestricted by smoker's pollutants.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next