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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (7824)	12/21/2005 5:37:35 PM
From: neolib	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542043

pragmatic situations resulting in a compromise Sure, but I could say that about all of them. Remember, you are a pragmatic Libertarian. you mean shooting firearms without strong specific precautions Safety and noise restrictions. But also crime related. I believe that carrying a loaded weapons in the window of my car in the Bay Area would have been a problem, but not in eastern Oregon. The hard part is determining exactly where to draw the line. That is always the problem. With any of this. 6) Some freedom of expression I'm not sure what you mean but that in the context of increased regulations in cities. Cities with racially charged situations, or simply lefty cities in general might attempt to enforce PC speech more than rural areas was my thought. Freedom of speech is curtailed on both the left and right, but for different reasons. Both anti-sodomy laws and "politically correct" speech codes, would be anti-libertarian. But they are opposite sides of the Libertarian spectrum. I'm pretty convinced that freedom of ideas and expression do in fact impact ones neighbors, just as do economic or property issues. But it is more difficult deciding what the moral limits of infringing on this right should be. The current US debate on ID/creationism vs. evolution is a case in point. Conservative religious people are quite correct to note that state science classes are destructive to the religious views of certain Christian denominations. There is no dancing around that issue. However, the state is not responsible for any group holding views which are contrary to reality. So what to do? Same goes for sexual matters. My parents think that increased acceptance of gay's in the USA 'promotes' homosexuality and lowers the nations morals. I think thats simply ignorance. What about teen sexuality? What about your 13 year old daughter deciding she has a right to be a prostitute? Fundamental rights get curtailed all the time in democratic systems, and there is no clean way of understanding which are optimal AFAIK.