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: Mama Bear who wrote (2656)	5/8/1999 10:15:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13056

Barb, as I said, it is not clear whether there is causality or mere correlation, but that is part of the risk- assessment. If there is a reasonable case to be made for causality, yes, it makes sense to penalize the 10th person... I wasn't representing your views about Prohibition. I mentioned that you bring it up whenever we discuss "vice crimes", and then said why I thought that it is a false analogy. It is true that I do not have much practical experience with the matter, but it is simply true that cocaine and heroin, for example, are not made in the kitchen. I have no idea what this sentence means:"The red herring about the number of users of the particular substance is the tyranny of the majority at its finest." Alcohol, in any case, is more destructive in terms of absolute numbers, but less so in terms of the percentage of users who cause problems. In any case, the arguments about the futility of the Prohibition of alcohol were multiple....

To: Mama Bear who wrote (2656)	5/8/1999 12:03:00 PM
From: halfscot	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13056

Mama Bear and Neocon: If I can wade in on the discussion between you re: pornography and its effects on social behavior. Do you remember Nixon's 'Commission on Pornography' when he attempted to show the correlation between pornography and violence against women, children, etc.? I remember things not going to Nixon's liking and him replacing several members of the commission. What he didn't like was the research showing no correlation between the availability of pornography and violence. Instead the research pointed to the availability of 'violence' as being a major catalyst to 'violence' while the availability of pornography as having the same effect to consentual sex. Once Nixon had the people on the commission he wanted they came up with a kangaroo-court-like decision condemning pornography which was subsequently discredited and ignored. I remember the whole thing being swept under the rug and nothing coming of it in supporting Nixon's agenda to pass laws regulating pornography. Again, it's what would seem to make sense not making sense after all once one looks at the published scientific data. halfscot

To: Mama Bear who wrote (2656)	5/9/1999 1:38:00 AM
From: Andy Thomas	Respond to of 13056

>>It makes more sense that pornographic images are a symptom of a problem rather than a cause. If 9 out of 10 viewers of pornography commit rape, what of the 10th? Why should he suffer for the acts of the other 9? It is the act that should be punished, and not peripheral activities.<< Exactly. >> I believe one could make a reasonable argument for incarcerating all men under that logic. After all, practically all violent crimes are committed by men, and quite the majority of violent crime committed by women is inspired by men. Perhaps with cloning and some further advances of science, we'll be able to do away with the Y chromosome completely. << Maybe let them out when they're 40? "Testosterone poisoning" is tough to deal with in this "civilized world" of ours. <g> FWIW Andy