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: Lane3 who wrote (71551)	8/5/2003 7:23:49 AM
From: Tom Clarke	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Or, of course, it may be bigotry I can't believe that thought would occur to you. I don't think Neo has a bigoted bone in his body. The trouble is this country is imbued with a strong strain of Puritan thought, (lefties suffer from it too) which somehow elevates sexual sin above most other sins.

To: Lane3 who wrote (71551)	8/5/2003 7:36:54 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I am not considering homosexuality as immoral at all, so your analysis fails.

To: Lane3 who wrote (71551)	8/5/2003 8:17:41 AM
From: epicure	Respond to of 82486

You have merely given a reason for his prejudice. And I suspect you are right about the reason. But it isn't "reasonable" or "logical" if you don't start from the same moral premise Neo does. So, while we all have our prejudices, this one of Neo's continues to look unreasonable to me. Now there's nothing per se wrong with Neo holding an unreasonable prejudice, but there is something wrong with codifying the products of such things into law. If Neo merely wanted to be prejudiced around his house, or as he made his way through the world, I would fully support him in that. Freedom, after all, means you can be prejudiced or not be prejudiced. But when you impact the freedom of others, by suggesting that unfair laws stay the law because of your prejudice, then you have gone too far- but only then. Free thought and free speech compel me to support the rights of the prejudiced to be prejudiced. Though I certainly will not cede my right to comment on such prejudices.

To: Lane3 who wrote (71551)	8/5/2003 11:16:52 AM
From: The Philosopher	Respond to of 82486

Excellent post. Bravo. It is so quick and easy for some people to refuse complex thinking and just toss around words like "prejudice" and "discrimination" without any concern for the realities. Not that I think your post will fall on anything but deaf ears -- those who want to think badly of others enjoy slinging accusations too much to change -- but it's nice to see intelligent analysis at least put out there perhaps to shame momentarily those who need shaming. Not, I think, that that was your intent, since you don't engage in shaming people on either side, but....