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.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (10278)	4/22/2002 3:15:40 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

"For one thing, we don't need to learn yet another time (Prohibition?) that laws that cannot practically be enforced tend to generate more lawlessness (beyond that particular law), than law-abiding. Yes, prohibition of alcohol caused a terrible backlash of extreme and indulgent behavior for which we still see some remnant excesses. Likewise in 1968 the police came to the home of Steven Stills and vacumned every inch of his carpet to come up with a marijuana seed for which he was charged with a crime. The following years showed extreme excess as a reaction to this kind of "official" action that to common youth seemed irrational. The extent of our involvement in Vietnam in the late sixties and early seventies did not match the conscious sensibilities of the average free thinking citizen and resulted in a boiling kettle who's lid eventually flew. When the "official" position of a society is askew from the common sensibilities of its citizenry all kind of excesses present themselves. Our nightly news reported that acts of violence this year perpetrated against gays is up 650%. This is in the presence of most school districts having adopted "awareness education and tolerance training" programs. The reaction of the "Colorado" government to this statistic was to promise a new round of hate crime legislation. Are we once again failing to deal with an issue in a common sense manner. I do not condone this type of violence but it should be common sense that it is a reaction to some societal "official" pressures that are not sensible and yet going unchecked.

To: J. C. Dithers who wrote (10278)	4/22/2002 6:49:16 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

If you oppose laws against sexual behavior between consenting adults, we aren't so far apart, then; except that we evidently differ about whether gays should suffer S.O., and I consider that finding something repulsive to yourself is very different from pronouncing it immoral. I believe that Howard Stern is immoral for effectually pressuring the naive impressionable into engaging in potentially injurious behavior to increase his ratings. I don't accept that those who engage in such behavior itself responsibly and consensually and enjoy it are immoral.