SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Politics : To be a Liberal,you have to believe that..... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: pezz who wrote (5768)3/14/2000 11:50:00 AM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 6418
 
Suppose you are as sure as is humanly possible that a child has crawled into a building that is about to be demolished. Would you exert yourself to prevent the demolition? Now, suppose that you are only pretty sure. Would you still hold up the demolition? Now, suppose that there is a one in three chance that the child is in there......How sure do you have to be that the building is empty before you demolish it? Would it be wrong for the law to require "due diligence" in ensuring that the building was empty, and to hold one accountable if one blasted away irresponsibly?



To: pezz who wrote (5768)3/14/2000 12:22:00 PM
From: lorrie coey  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 6418
 
You DaMan...!

Succinct.

[I hope that's taken as a compliment, as intended-]



To: pezz who wrote (5768)3/14/2000 2:18:00 PM
From: The Philosopher  Respond to of 6418
 
Of course, the problem is that once a belief gets enacted into law it becomes an opinion imposed on others. On either side of the question. Our present law allows the killing of what may be sentient human beings. But a change in the law would impose punishment on people who believed in the right to rid their bodies of what they viewed as bundles of cells.