[MD] So cometh MOQ, what next?

[pholden at davtv.com]

Quoting ARLO J BENSINGER JR <ajb102 at psu.edu>:


> [Arlo]
> The question is not whether or not a majority will impose social pressue on a
> minority to behave a certain way (I'm not sure if its possible NOT to have this
> happen), but whether or not that majority has the right to use force to prevent
> non-violent behavior that does not conform. Remember that the "veil" issue
> orginated when Platt remarked it was a victory for Intellect to use FORBID BY
> LAW people from wearing veils. We've drifted from this somewhat, but that's
> also the key to Rebecca's and Gav's comments, and also what Horse suggests.
> Namely, that people while social pressure will always be a part of group
> behavior, we should not use "the law" to forbid behavior on the basis that it
> "offends", or is "aesthetically unappealing" or whatever slippery-slope du jour
> Platt offers ("Rape", by the way, is the latest. I guess he felt "public
> fornication" was not ridiculous enough).

Typical of Arlo to duck questions by labeling them "ridiculous," "idotic," 
"stupid" or whatever childish taunt he can think of, as if his opinion ought
to be accepted simply because he, Arlo, gave it. But at least he favors us by
offering examples in nearly every post of intellectually empty judgmentalism,   
useful for educational purposes. :-)

Platt






    

-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/