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: one_less who wrote (80733)	6/18/2004 8:40:12 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Perhaps Solon is making no distinction between the obligation not to do something abusive to someone else and an affirmative obligation to do something for someone else. I would not extend the idea of personal freedom to include freedom to actively abuse someone, but I generally support personal freedom over government imposed mandates that we actively do something for someone else. I wouldn't apply this to all cases, I do think their are important responsibilities and in some cases others may have to impose those responsibilities on us, but I would place far higher hurdles in front of any government attempt to impose an affirmative active responsibility then I would in front of an attempt to prevent action that is or could be abusive. Tim

To: one_less who wrote (80733)	6/21/2004 2:29:17 PM
From: Solon	Respond to of 82486

"...you do not nor does the government have the natural right or the power to force me to serve someone or do anything to another person in a way that violates my conscience." I see no relationship between my declaration of freedom from servitude and the examples of sexual abuse you keep posting. Do you have a fetish about this? "Just because a person conscientiously believes in sexual freedom with children beneath the age of majority does not serve as a defense." _______________________________________ I would rather you did not take recourse to the childish tactics of non response, misdirection, and personal attack. You know very well that my example had nothing to do with any personal aspersions against you. It was given to demonstrate the fact that a conscientious belief does not override the will of society to preserve law and order and to protect people from mistreatment. You also know very well that slavery is illegal and that there has never been any support on this thread for the idea that it ought not to be. usinfo.state.gov