Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: microhoogle! who wrote (39176)	9/22/2000 10:30:34 AM
From: Bill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Murali, now we're getting somewhere. Congrats on sharing some of your point of view (even though I disagree with much of it). Now doesn't that feel better than the useless one-liners and urls?

To: microhoogle! who wrote (39176)	9/22/2000 11:57:55 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

Sorry to have taken awhile getting back to you, I had calls that took up more time than I thought they would. The key to a lot of the things that happen around here is this fear of the "religious right". I say two things: countries like Sweden and the UK have established churches, and no one thinks they are theocracies--- in the States, it would not even get so far; and the social issues are matters of morality, not religious dogma. Nat Hentoff, the civil libertarian, is a pro-life atheist, for example. Opposition to abortion has to do with a concern for not eroding inhibitions against harming the weak among humanity, and not treating maternity with contempt, but preserving a certain reverence for life. Since, from zygote to grandfather, it is essentially the same organism, in various conditions of development and dependency, it makes sense to forbid abortion at any point. I myself think the matter belongs back in state legislatures, and that there should be an ascending scale of penalties at each new trimester, to reflect the degree of controversiality attending each stage, but I also think that at no point should society say that it is OK, and a private matter. On homosexual rights: homosexuality is too controversial to overthrow all cultural norms for. It is clearly a deviance, whether or not harmful, and although I believe it should be treated with tolerance, I do not think it should be raised to such a level of dignity as to weaken the norm. We should be reinforcing social expectations supporting family formation and the devotion to one's spouse and children, not calling such expectations into question. On the impeachment: Starr got into the Lewinsky matter in order to try to crack the conspiracy of silence that thwarted his other investigations, mainly, in fact, to gain leverage with Vernon Jordan. That did not pan out, but he did uncover irrefutable evidence of perjury and obstruction. No republic can afford to have its chief magistrate flout the rules so blatantly without censure. It is arguable about what the proper outcome of the trial was, but I believe there was no avoiding impeachment, which is the prescibed constitutional method of censure.