From: Technotranscendence (neptune@mars.superlink.net)
Date: Mon Jul 26 1999 - 20:00:55 MDT
On Monday, July 26, 1999 1:06 PM Lee Daniel Crocker
lcrocker@mercury.colossus.net wrote:
> Yes, quackwatch.com is overly regulation-friendly. Many libertarian
> sites are quack-friendly. While neither of those is a great combination,
> both nonetheless contain valuable information. I don't think extropians
> will have any trouble ignoring the political undertones of Quackwatch.
> As a libertarian, I would not choose to use state force to shut down a
> naturopath or a supplement seller or even a psychic--but that doesn't
> mean I approve of them or would want my daughter to marry one. I would
> not call the cops on a homeopath, nor would I prevent neo-Nazis from
> publishing a newsletter, but I would not allow either one in my house.
> Libertarian politics do not preclude moral judgment.
I agree. I think the two go together -- libertarian politics implies the
ability of each person to judge. Nonlibertarian politics implies a lack of
that ability and a need, to the degree of regulation advocated, for someone
else's judgment to take the place of individuals in society.
But I add nothing new to this thread... Forgive the noise.:)
Cheers!
Daniel Ust
http://mars.superlink.net/neptune/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:04:34 MST