Subject:
|
Re: "France is not a Western Country anymore"
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 22 Apr 2003 12:31:02 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1064 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richie Dulin writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richie Dulin writes:
> > > Adultery is wrong.
> >
> > Why is it wrong?
>
> You don't think it is wrong?
I think breaching a contract is wrong. That's a general principle.
My contract prohibits it. Why? I personally don't think that it would be a
good idea for me personally to be an adulterer. So it would be wrong for me.
But I am not so presumptuous to decide that is the case for everyone, so if
someone else's contract isn't written that way, then no, it isn't wrong for
them.
Adultery, to my way of thinking, is not a crime, per se, as rights are not
being clearly violated, absent a specific contract spelling them out. Note
that the parties to the contract are the marriage partners.
> > In general, I don't have to sell my house multiple times to know what the
> > value is, I can use comps and appraisals if I really need to know a value at
> > a particular time.
>
> Yes, because a house is a good for which there is a market. But how much are
> you worth, dead?
Wrongful death suits, as prosecuted in today's current system in the US (and
I believe in Oz too) deal with this question all the time. Do you disagree
that they manage to answer this question, somehow? (not whether they always
get the right answer)
> > But we digress... Do you agree or disagree with the assertion that sharia is
> > not a particularly just system and further, that it may be symptomatic of a
> > fundamental problem with islam being considered a religion of 'peace'? I
> > didn't get a clear answer there yet I don't think....
>
> I think it is no more just than the system which declares all rights are
> property rights.
You haven't given a cogent argument why such a system is unjust. But even
so, you're using property rights based systems as a red herring, because the
system I prefer is not the system that Australia or the US currently uses.
Be specific.
Is Sharia more or less just than the current system of law in effect in
Australia, in your view?
Is a religion that requires all residents of a country to adhere to its
system more or less tolerant than one that does not?
These are both clear questions. Please answer them without prevarication, if
you can, or admit that you cannot. If you cannot answer these questions
without prevarication, you're wasting my time.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: "France is not a Western Country anymore"
|
| (...) <snipped the adultery bit> (...) Determined by a judicial process... so once again, you need a judiciary... and because your theoretical system is dynamic, values for transgressions need to be determined each and every time, so it's going to (...) (22 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: "France is not a Western Country anymore"
|
| (...) Ahh... so we can dispense with the beaurocracy do determine the price of the crime and build a judiciary instead. Seems like a good idea. But what is this mention of a criminal penalty? How does that fit with an 'all rights are property (...) (22 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
66 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
