From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@yahoo.com)
Date: Thu Oct 31 2002 - 19:00:06 MST
--- Charles Hixson <charleshixsn@earthlink.net> wrote:
> On Monday 28 October 2002 14:28, Lee Daniel Crocker wrote:
> > > ...If you replaced the word "socialists" with "women" or "blacks"
> > > in any one of your postings on the subject they'd be offensive;
> > > I don't see why you should get off the hook just for picking on a
> > > group that isn't flavour of the month among libertarian
> extropians.
> >
> > The flaw in this argument should be pretty obvious: one does not
> > /choose/ to be black or female. One /does/ choose to support
> > socialism, and to a lesser extent, one's religion (though there's
> > a lot of parental/cultural influence there). It is just and right
> > to hold people accountable for their freely-made choices. They
> are,
> > in fact, the only thing you /can/ rightly judge someone's
> > character by.
>
> That may be a weakness in the analogy, but I don't see it as a flaw
> in an argument. No argument was being made. What was being made
> was a statement of intent.
And a bogus statement it was. If you are not so objective that you
aren't willing to freely and objectively examine issues of race,
gender, as well as tendencies of some individuals to believe in stupid
and obsolete political ideologies, you really don't belong on this list.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:54 MST