Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Basic distinctions.

  1. The fact that you find it disgusting does not make it wrong. If this is not true, then it is wrong that people are stupid, for stupidity disgusts me. (Similarly, the fact that you find it admirable does not make it right.)
  2. The fact that it is wrong does not make it illegal. Nor does it imply that it should be illegal. It is wrong to lie, cheat at cards, and commit adultery, but there are good reasons not to make any of these illegal (mostly due to problems with enforcement).
  3. Liberty implies that people should be allowed to do things you find disgusting, including produce video games, movies, music, and the like. You can protest, boycott, rage, and otherwise try to resist it, but illegality needs to be reserved for protecting people from actual and demonstrable dangers.
These should be obvious points, but people seem to be turning off their brains about things like this, and it's getting annoying.

1 comment:

bigfan2 said...

I got into a debate with some of my classmates in Professional Responsibility. The assignment was to draft a set of interrogatories for potential applicants to the state bar. We did pretty well, and got a lot of the important ones (list all previous employers, list any and all felonies of which you have been charged, etc.), but I firmly believed (and still do believe) that a question regarding whether you have ever committed adultery is an unreasonable privacy invasion. My primary reason was the enforcement issue; their argument was that it goes to moral fitness.

I'm right, dammit. ;-)