 | | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) The druggist is clearly and willfully taking action that is harmful to a human life. If you consider that immoral, then it is immoral. His motivations do not matter. Even if he is (under his moral code) preventing a greater evil (for example, (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) No, it was to increase the level of information in the market place. I WANT sellers to dig out rare sets, and I want buyers to buy them. If they are blowing their money on stuff they can get at retail, they're not spending their money on rare (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Hmm... Important to Hienz's claim on the drug? No. They're not. Hienz has no claim to the drug if he hasn't acquired it from the druggist in some manner (trading/selling/performing services/etc.. not threats or beatings, etc., though) Is it (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) As with all these little morality puzzles, we don't have enough facts to conclude that. For all we know, Heinz skipped buying health insurance to cover the drug because he wanted to go bowling, or because he needed the money to pay his last (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Neither more nor less, because they are not actually different things. Right to life and right to property are the same thing. ALL rights are property rights in my schema. The "right to life" as I see it is my right to dispose of my life as I (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) All of these are irrelevant to the main thrust. The druggist's motivations for not selling are not important. (...) Why? (...) Allow me to draw a parallel hypothetical situation. There is a natural disaster, and several people are left in a (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) This is why Libertarianism breaks down because mean people suck. Not all people are good. If *everyone* had a good heart, people would be able to respect property rights AND each other's needs as well. But as it is, a heartless Bunghole is (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) So in your schema, right to property is more important than right to life. (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Old debates die hard :) (...) I certainly agree here. Heinz doesn't appear to me to have any right to the drug; and neither does his wife. Rights don't really seem to dictate proper ownership in this case other than the druggist. After all, (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) [2] (...) Agreed. No moral situation here. (possibly an ethical one, but that's a different debate, and this case doesn't have enough information to make an ethical judgement). However, I'm fairly certain I can make a good case for the (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Weeeelllll... I know I'm walking into the same old debate as before! But it seems SO clear cut to me. In my opinion Heinz doesn't have the right to the drug. If this drug really truly is somehting Heinz is incapable of inventing for himself, (...) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Don Quixote puts away his lance (was Re: McDonalds set
|
|
(...) Mayhap I'm confused. How is this a moral dilema? James (URL) (25 years ago, 27-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The NFL has expanded to the point of mediocrity
|
|
(...) can (...) I agree that expansion must be put in check. It is really just one really big piramid scheme where the older teams get all the expansion money and the new teams have to agree to lower TV revenue for a certain period. It all seems to (...) (25 years ago, 26-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | The NFL has expanded to the point of mediocrity
|
|
Interesting discussion going on in rec.music.arts.drumcorps. Have the recent expansion teams in the NFL created a mediocrity in most franchises? The great players no longer have teams that can back them up: Young, Rice, Moss, Favre, Smith, Davis, (...) (25 years ago, 26-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: George McGovern quote
|
|
(...) But are you referring to a socialist society or a capitalist society? Surely, in a socialist society, you owe everything to everyone, and in a capitalist one you owe it all to yourself. How about we start with a given: we need both. A purely (...) (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: George McGovern quote
|
|
(...) I'll bite and expand it a little. Since the rich would not have been able to get rich in the first place without the benefit of the system and people on whose backs they climbed (the low income schlubs who work for them), they *do* owe a debt (...) (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: George McGovern quote
|
|
(...) At a guess -- and this is just a guess, mind you -- they pay for it and they work for it. All at the expense of neglecting the poor and the infirm, who deserve it more. (1) Cheers, - jsproat 1. Yes, this is chum for a troll. Discuss. :-, (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | (canceled)
|
|
|
| |
| | I don't want to live in Paducah, KY
|
|
(URL) favorite quote: "We should be getting information out to workers and residents in a better way than we're doing at the present," Michaels said. No kidding. Who says government regulation, standards or oversight makes you safe? (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | George McGovern quote
|
|
"Rich people, healthy people, they don't need much attention from the government." (just heard on Larry King Live) So why do they get so much? :-) (25 years ago, 21-Sep-99, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
