To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 5218
5217  |  5219
Subject: 
Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Sun, 2 Apr 2000 00:05:57 GMT
Viewed: 
396 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:

I profoundly disagree. It is liberals who are anti-freedom.

You're not clearly distinguishing betweeen personal and economic freedom, so
you fall into the one dimensional trap.

Unsurprisingly, I agree with Larry.  Liberals are trying to limit different
freedoms than conservatives.  I think that any time a citizen is coerced into
some action by a body of governance (or by an individual, it amounts to the
same thing) their freedoms are being limited and impinged upon.

Liberals are the
ones trying to tax and regulate anything that moves.

This suggests that you believe that conservatives (that is, the GOP) do not
wish to regulate things.  That's just not so.

Abortion, homosexuality, drugs etc. are not matters of
freedom but BASIC morality. All of these things are demonstrably destructive.

a) no they're not

Right.  If they're demonstrably destructive (to what?), then please
demonstrate.  I guess you could say that abortion destroys that blob of
semi-differntiated parasitic tissue.  What does homosexuality destroy?  Maximal
reproductive capacity?  Oh darn.  And drugs?  My folks were hippies and did all
that they could afford back in the day.  They don't any more.  They and their
offspring all survived and are in the most productive (as measured by income)
quartile of population.  What was destroyed by their silly experimentation?

I vehemently dispute that homosexuality is in and of itself destructive.

Or even vaguely linked to destruction of any meaningful sense.

I vehemently dispute that all drugs are destructive. Even all recreational
drugs, since clearly you're not arguing that penicillin is destructive.

It's destructive to bacteria.  Except for the ones who learn to be immune to
it.

Abortion... I just don't even want to discuss that. No common basis as long as
you believe that life begins at conception. DON'T respond, there's nothing to
say.

I've been wanting to start a discussion on abortion.  I seriously think this is
a tough issue.  Having an abortion obviously stops a human life.  But why do we
care?  It's a life that society has nothing invested in and it happens all the
time naturally.  So why all the uproar?  It's easy for me to slip into a
pro-choice mindset (and I guess that's ultimately where I fall) but it _is_
killing a human.  We normally call that murder.  And what's so magical about
any particular age line that we establish as a cut-off for acceptability?

I think the solution is to keep it legal (and safe) but to shun people who
engage in that activity as a social means of forcing them to make more
societally acceptable choices.

And another thing (while I'm ranting) why do 'normal' folks see it as so
horrible or unthinkable that pro-life zealots murder abortion service
providers?  If you believed that abortion was the same thing as murdering fully
developed people, wouldn't you be willing to put an abortion doctor's life on
the scale with their multiple victims and come to the same conclusion?  It just
doesn't seem like that much of a stretch to me.

Chris



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
 
Chris, (...) on (...) just (...) I wonder what you are truly saying here, Chris. Zealots are on both sides of the abortion issue, both for and against. I don't think murdering people for most reasons is acceptable (outside of capitol punishment or (...) (25 years ago, 3-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)  

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Reagan... not exactly libertarian, but close
 
(...) You're not clearly distinguishing betweeen personal and economic freedom, so you fall into the one dimensional trap. (...) No I'm not. Take the quiz. (...) 2 points. a) no they're not I vehemently dispute that homosexuality is in and of itself (...) (25 years ago, 1-Apr-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

58 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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR