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 : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: miraje who wrote (33978)	2/14/1999 12:47:00 AM
From: Johannes Pilch	Respond to of 67261

>I don't dismiss it. I am pro-choice but would argue vehemently in favor of your position on the funding issue.< Well then lets hear you do this. I have heard you claim fundamentalists are attempting to force their beliefs upon the entire populace, but I have not heard you “argue vehemently in favor of [their] position on the funding [of abortion] issue. (Of course should you do this, you will then be arguing for the enforcement of your beliefs upon the entire populace.) >Matter of fact, I think that the government should be out of the health care business completely, but that's a whole 'nother subject.< Then you think something should be forced on the entire populace. >Sex education in public schools has to be a compromise, unfortunately. I'd favor more, you'd favor less, or none. There's no easy solution. If parents would educate their own kids on this subject, it wouldn't need to be on the school curriculum at all.< Perhaps, but my beef with you concerns your belief that fundamentalists want to force their views on the entire populace. You see, you favor more sex education. Then you favor something being forced on the entire populace. (Not that you would actually do it) >Again, I concede and agree with your point. Affordable educational alternatives to public schools are the answer. You would send your kids to a school that teaches them from a religious conservative oriented perspective and I would send mine to one with a free thinking, secular, libertarian philosophy. Choices are needed.< If you would argue for choice, then you argue for something that should be forced upon the entire populace. (You once said you would have my schooling publicly funded.) >El wrongo, amigo. I'm quite confident that your taste in art differs greatly from mine, but people like me, (libertarian), are as much against publicly funded art as you are. I'll fight for your right not to involuntarily fund pornography and sacrilege and fight just as hard for my right to purchase and view said same, if I so choose.< Of course this was not my point. My point concerned the fact that along with all the other things I mentioned, this “art” is being forced upon me at my expense. When I attempt to change these and other such things via the system, you claim I am trying to force my beliefs upon the entire populace. The fact is, I am not do anything other than what was already done to me. If you must complain about me, complain about everyone. Do not single me out. >Consider yourself lucky that your values are only under attack from the left. Mine are under "assault" from across the whole spectrum. LOL!!< LOL. Very true. >Not quite. My moral code is based on a rejection of impositions. I would be happy if more people shared my philisophical premises and value system but would not countenance forcing it on anyone.< When you lobby against those who you perceive want to force their views upon the entire populace, you in fact are trying to force your views upon the entire populace. You see, this is a fact of the system. If you even open your mouth concerning a subject affecting society, you likely are trying to force your belief upon the entire populace. Complain against yourself and everyone else. Don't pick on the fundies simply because it is considered cool to do so. We are trying to survive just like you. >One is the loneliest number. Individuals are the smallest and most vulnerable minority of all. Individual rights are the fountainhead of liberty. Libertarians labor in relative obscurity to protect and restore these rights for all of us.< Then they labor to force their beliefs upon the entire populace. I happen to agree with many of their views. Indeed I am currently investigating Christian Libertarianism. >Well and good. Pray before school, pray during and after school, as you desire. Just don't mandate or sponsor public school prayer.< The point is not to mandate PUBLIC prayer, but to allow PRIVATE prayer or even nose picking, just before work. Freedom of choice, you see. You ought to really be in favor of this. >I do, consistently and across the board. I am not an anarchist, but firmly believe in greatly reducing the power and scope of government from current levels.< Same here. But you see, you did single out fundamentalists as if they are doing what no one else is doing. This is a very popular thing to do, but it is terribly flawed and unsophisticated. I am not upset about it at all. I simply want that you understand that we simply do as you do. >That's funny, Daniel Schuh said essentially the same thing to me when we were engaged in argument over anti-trust, Microsoft, and the government. There are many laws that need to be changed or eliminated... :-)< If you believe this, then you believe something should be forced upon the entire populace. LOL (hurrying to bed) P.S. If you like Chardonnay, you will perhaps love Montrachet. It has a flinty steelness that I find extraordinary.