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: TimF who wrote (77131)	10/9/2003 7:16:34 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Will you return the favor and agree that it is legitimate for me to hold the belief of conscience that people should be allowed to associate and do business with those that they want to associate and do business with and not associate with those that they don't want to associate with? Certainly. Absolutely. I agree it is legitimate for you to hold that belief. But I will try to make sure that the legislature of whatever entity we find outselves in is more favorable to my belief than yours. Because there is, of course, a major difference between legitimate beliefs of conscience, and the rules that make for the most enlightened and just society. And yes, I do grant your right to argue that your beliefs are more in tune with an elightened and just society than mine are. And I do not discount the possibility, if we are people of goodwill, that we will find a compromise position we can both find that recognizes the interests of the other's principles without doing too much violence to our own. But, of course that recognizes the need to discuss issues dispassionately and accept the possibility of compromise.

To: TimF who wrote (77131)	10/9/2003 7:36:09 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

There was an interesting situation at the University of Washington (my law school alma mater) yesterday. It was based on an event that may have started at SMU. Anyhow, a group put on a cookie sale in which the price of cookies varied depending on the race of the purchaser. Blacks and Native Americans would pay, say, 25 cents, Asians 35 cents, whites 50 cents. It caused such a ruckus that the University closed it down. Rather than controlling the objectors, of course, they shut down those who were peacefully making a point. Free speech rights yield to the mob because the University wasn't willing to arrest those violating the law. If it had been, say, Nazis disrupting a march for equal rights, does anybody think the march would have been stopped and the Nazis left unaffected? Anybody want to even put that forward as a theoretical possibility?