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 : High Tolerance Plasticity -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: kodiak_bull who wrote (22137)	11/3/2004 3:52:00 PM
From: Sun Tzu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 23153

>> First of all, the pursuit of happiness isn't in the Constitution, that is, it ain't the law. That's in the Declaration Of course I know that. >> which is, for these purposes, a meaningless document. What?!! Now surprise would be an understatment for what I feel hearing this. The Declaration of Independence provides the context for which the constitution was developed. It is every bit important when it comes to interpreting the constitution. I stand by my statement, though I admit I am a libertarian by nature. >> Why should what you call a "live theatre or dance performance", assuming it involves taking off most of all of one's clothing, be protected, CONSTITUTIONALLY? OK, I walk through the logic. The courts have interpreted freedom of speech to mean freedom of expression, because that is the most reasonable interpretation of the 1st Amendment. A literal interpretation would mean, among other things, that those who are born without the gift of speech are deprived from a most important right. I hope you are not going to argue that before someone is allowed to act out or perform their speech they have to cut off their own tongue. Assuming you agree with the above, which renders speech, writing, acting, painting, etc as all being forms of expression protected by the First Amendment, then the question becomes this: how do you limit nude performance on stage without limiting rights of "legitimate" performers? In other words, how do you legislate which performances are protected and which ones are not? ST PS I am every bit for the Second Amendment.

To: kodiak_bull who wrote (22137)	11/3/2004 4:27:39 PM
From: The Ox	Respond to of 23153

Why are so many Americans unbelievably up tight about a person's body? We all have them, you know. What is it about a naked person that gets American's knickers in such a twist? Do we all still have to live by 17th century Puritanical Christian values or can we move into the 21st century? One needs only to look at the repression that happened to women in Afghanistan under the Taliban to see how far this can go. How is that any different from what many of the "Moral Majority" want to impose on all Americans? Yes, let's take if even further. Artistic expression, in the view of one person, is going to be pornography to another. Do we outlaw all art because we can't all agree on what exactly is art and what is pornography?