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: Kevin Rose who wrote (424771)	7/9/2003 4:06:15 PM
From: Johannes Pilch	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

Kevin: You seem a kind man, but this approach of yours doesn't work. You say Tax cuts are bad, because taken to the extreme means no taxes at all (and anarchy). But this is no explanation at all. It is simply to say “tax cuts are bad, because taken to the extreme means there will be no taxes.” You define “badness” here as “no taxes,” and that is simply not self-evident. (grin) Roughly, here is how you might get to the bottom of the thing. “Are extreme tax cuts bad? Let's cut all taxes. The same money will remain in the social system, but not in the hand of government. Is that innately bad? Obviously not. Nothing has been stolen, since theoretically it belonged to the people in the first place. But the government has obligations to fulfill. Without funds, it will fail. Failing here is what is bad. It is the defaulting that is bad – not the tax cuts.” Now we have gone to the essentials of the thing and have found this “badness” has one essential root: it is contrary to humanity (PLEASE don't ask me spell out the fundamental thing here. It should be apparent to you). The problem is not with tax cuts, not even with extreme tax cuts. The problem is not with debt repayment, not even with extreme debt repayment. The problem is not with gorging on desserts. The problem ONLY takes place when humanity is infringed. We may cut every tax, but as long as we are able to fulfill our obligations to others, humanity is not violated. We may pay off all debts, and as long as we can fulfill our obligations in the bond market, human nature is not violated. We may eat every dessert, but as long as we do not intentionally cause our own demise, human nature is yet intact. Your comments are seriously flawed because you incorrectly portray homosexuality as a 'moderate change’ in humanity while portraying child abuse and bestiality as extremes. All of these are corruptions of humanity, all are extremes and for the same essential reason. The slippery path of decay certainly does go through homosexuality, through child abuse and through bestiality because once we accept one, we absolutely must accept the others. (Well... we may logically remove some "child" abuse from the path, but not as comfortably as you might think. There is just no logic in nature that declares, for example, that 17 year olds are not adults. But given that “abuse” of others exists, there we have a violation of the human scheme, an infringement upon the natural rights of another. So we may discount child abuse.) We can certainly not remove bestiality from the path. As long as homosexuality is there, then polygamy and bestiality are there too. You have no fundamentally valid reason to deny people who have multiple simultaneous sex partners and people who have sex with animals, the same affirmation you give to homosexuals. You may only say “I just don’t like that other stuff” and that is just no valid reason once you corrupt your identity by accepting homosexuality.

To: Kevin Rose who wrote (424771)	7/10/2003 10:34:33 PM
From: PROLIFE	Respond to of 769670

A tax cut is not the same issue as the unnatural act of a man porking another man... Nor is the deficit... Nor are deserts... Nor is civil rights... It is as unnatural as a 30 year old man raping a 9 year old boy OR girl, and as unnatural as a man humping a sheep.