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.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: ManyMoose who wrote (100897)	4/10/2005 2:14:51 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

"There are ways to achieve that without forcing incompatible lifestyles to coexist in such a way that no one can be comfortable. " I question this. I am completely comfortable with other people having very different lifestyles from mine- and allowing them to "coexist" with me. I do not want to limit the lifestyles of any of the adults who participate in my girls' girlscout troops, for example. I think wanting to limit others lifestyles, and their participation in the community, because you are not "comfortable" with what they do on their own time, with their own bodies, is wrong (as long as whatever they do sexually is between adults). We are down to basic philosophical premises here. I believe that people should be able to do pretty much whatever they want (as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else- "Hurt" NOT being defined as "what you are doing makes me feel uncomfortable even though it affects me in no other way.) You believe, as you have stated, that we can exclude people (and children presumably, since they are people too) who have incompatible "lifestyles" that make other people uncomfortable. So you are not really for freedom and choice. You are for freedom and choice that doesn't make people uncomfortable- forgive me for pointing out that freedom and choice only mean something at the margins where people DO feel uncomfortable. The mainstream choice rarely needs to be "protected".