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: The Philosopher who wrote (79354)	12/1/2003 9:03:46 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

"Are we both right? Both wrong? How do we know?" Even though you have some idea of what constitutes human rights we have on going debates regarding whether or not someone's rights have been violated. What makes you think it should be any different given a broader spectrum. "The distinguishing issue is on the part of the human being to abuse, corrupt, pollute, neglect, or behave with any malicious disregard." "Is cutting a block of marble out of the earth and carving it corruption? Is it corruption if one just chops it to pieces, but not corruption if one carves a beautiful statute out of it?" If it were clearly causing an unnecessarily negative impact on the environment we would probably find that the behavior was wrong. If it simply made a hole and no polution or corruption of the earth were to result we would probably agree that it is not a violation. In some cases we would get into lengthy arguments over whether or not it was poluting etc. We would not likely argue about whether or not abusing the forest, poluting, malicious disregard, corruption etc. was a violation... simply whether or not the behavior had risen to that level.