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 : Libertarian Discussion Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dave Reed who wrote (2648)	5/8/1999 7:28:00 AM
From: Mama Bear	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13056

Sometimes I wonder if I'm typical or unusual in my belief that folks who do use force or commit fraud should be punished harshly. There is no room in my model for probation, and parole would be granted only in the most extraordinary of circumstances. Perhaps an inmate who saved a guards life might be considered. One of the benefits I see to the Libertarian system is that it wouldn't use resources punishing silly things like drug offenses, and therefore those would be available to give those who deserve it their due. Barb

To: Dave Reed who wrote (2648)	5/8/1999 9:20:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13056

No one is denying a general "right of arousal", but there are two questions: is pornography covered by the 1st Amendment, and therefore protected by the Court, or subject to legislative give and take; and is it, or certain types of it, sufficiently detrimental to the community (which is, after all, composed of individuals) to justify strict regulation, and in some cases suppression. All I want to assert about the general questions is that it is not automatically subject to 1st Amendment protections, and that there are reasons to subject it to scrutiny for possible regulation or curtailment...