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 : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (45666)	2/27/2006 2:29:09 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

Again, you are just not "getting" it I "get" it, and then reject it. I have established the case In your own mind. Re: baseball analogy In a baseball game there is a much better claim to an implied contract than in real life. You choose to participate to a baseball game. The rules are widely known (and while some of them might be slightly obscure they are much simpler and clearer than the law), In this case he will be removed from the team and prevented from playing baseball until he has benefited from the lesson that he does not act alone within the group but must honor the agreement he assumes in playing the game. In a similar manner, individuals are removed from mainstream society when their actions threaten the stability of that society. Its not a similar manner at all. If you do violate the rules of baseball you normally will not be seized by force and locked up. Refusing to associate with you, or play the game with you, or let you on private property (the baseball field or stadium), isn't the same as arresting you. But the law does legally bind you to these agreements. Yes the law says what the law says. That does not mean there is any moral obligation involved. The obligation merely consists of the fact that you can be punished for not living up to the legal requirement. and naturally you are bound morally to it as it is the standard of correct behavior decided upon by democratic process at any one point in time. Not at all. The government gets to determine what it will promulgate as the standard of correct behavior, and what actions it will choose to punish, but it doesn't get to determine what actually is and is not correct behavior. Tim