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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dayuhan who wrote (20098)	8/1/2001 7:00:29 AM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 82486

Not wishing to regulate sexual behavior, except at the margins (public exposure, child molestation) does not mean the same as neutrality or approval. They can decide what they wish, I still find certain practices disgusting or degrading, and do not think consent sanitizes them......

To: Dayuhan who wrote (20098)	8/1/2001 12:21:50 PM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 82486

if we accept the principle that personal liberties should be restrained only if their exercise compromises the rights of others, that doesn't matter much. 1. The argument everything in the end affects other is as old as Donne, and of course much older, though he perhaps articulated it best. It's a dilemma my libertarian side has to deal with. 2. Our society, of course, hasn't accepted this argument. We have many laws which restrain activities which don't directly compromise the rights of others. 3. If you try to make that argument stick, how do you deal with consensual sex between and adult and a minor? Would you say it was legal? If it's legal for a 14 year old to have sex with another 14 year old, what's the basis for making sex between a 14 year old and a 21 year old illegal, if we follow your argument?