Posted on 09/18/2006 7:33:33 AM PDT by Neoliberalnot
I hope that's a rhetorical question. If you actually think pig schtuppers have a higher ethical ground than the people who think this is gross, well then, now you know why many people shy away from the libertarian platform.
Only the judgment of history provides the evidence, - as Arthur Koestler once commented :
"-- The continuous disasters of man's history are mainly due to his excessive capacity and urge to become identified with a tribe, nation, church or cause, and to espouse its credo uncritically and enthusiastically, even if its tenets are contrary to reason, devoid of self-interest and detrimental to the claims of self-preservation. We are thus driven to the unfashionable conclusion that the trouble with our species is not an excess of aggression, but an excess capacity for fanatical devotion. --"
First, you take the name of Paine, the guy who wrote in The Crisis of the "summer soldier and the sunshine patriot," yet you say that our problems spring from excessive identification "with a tribe, nation, church or cause." Gee, no contradiction there...
Indeed, there isn't.. -- Paine was writing about the fanatical English who were bound up in their "excessive identification with a nation, church and cause." -- Their 'cause' was empire..
Second, you're going on record that prohibiting sex with animals is "contrary to reason?"
Prohibiting most anything is contrary to 'reasonably regulating' .. We protect life, liberty, property in the USA by using due process of constitutional law to regulate sin. -- Writing and enforcing prohibitional type laws violate due process.
Third, and most importantly, you didn't provide any evidence of anything.
I admitted that only our history can provide that evidence. Our Constitution is an excellent source for researching that history.
I asked you to show that people X did action Y for the reason you said they did, and you responded with "People do all sorts of stuff because they're fanatical."
Yep, guarding peoples rights from fanatics is a big part of our history.
That's like a judge saying to a prosecuter, "Can you show that the defendant shot the victim for his money instead of self defense" and the prosecuter says, "Well, violence on TV is bad for kids." Can you back your accusation up or not?
Not to you I'd guess.
Of course you are (wink, wink).
Oookay, so you think bestiality is more or less equivalent to homosexual acts, in the sense of "no more offensive". And since (where ever you live) there are laws protecting same sex acts, it sounds (and you can set the record straight if I got it wrong) as though you think that bestiality ought to have similar legal protection?
If so, I am really glad that you apparently are not a US citizen.
I've mentioned this several times on FR, it fits on this discussion.
A few years ago I served on a grand jury for three months, once a week. Heard a lot and learned a lot. At our last meeting, the head DA for the county (a western rural red county in a blue state) and I were talking after everyone else had left. I thanked him for the opportunity to serve and told him how much I had learned. He was retiring, and I wished him a happy retirement. I also mentioned that it seemed as though the crime problems would not change unless public caning were instituted, as in Singapore.
He agreed, in perfect seriousness, that public caning was the only solution, but the public won't go for it.
Public pain and public shame would change peoples' behavior, whereas incarceration makes most people worse. It would save taxpayers an incredible amount of money, and wouldn't take years away from people - their punishment would be over very quickly and they could get another chance to act like a human being.
And wannabees would have a chance to do some deep thinking about their future.
Unless and until public corporal punishment is instituted, and proper use of the death penalty as well, we're going to see nothing but an increase of all manner of crimes, with honest citizenry more and more cowering in gated communities, windows barred, afraid to go for walks at night or use parks, or allow their children out of their sight.
Thanks for that info, and I agree.
My final comment:
If the justice system [sic] does not change and become more just, then it will be forced to change.
Kind of like the saying:
If you don't invite Reality in, sooner or later Reality will kick the door in.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.