From: "David Magnay" <sdh@crafti.com.au>
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 1997 16:50:49 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: FCPUNX:Freedom Forum report on the State of the First Amendm
In-Reply-To: <199712200009.TAA26091@beast.brainlink.com>
Message-ID: <199712220844.TAA27568@crafti.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



On 19 Dec 97 at 11:58, Jim Burnes wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 19 Dec 1997, David Honig wrote:  ...
> 
> > If one ever questions this in public, as Tim did, the liberal response
> > is to show that unPC 'discrimination' is possible if humans are free,
> > and then the dutiful citizen gladly sacrifices employers' liberty for
> > their warm and fuzzy feelings.  The first amendment is about what
> > government can't do to you, not what your  neighbor can or can't do. 
> 
> Yeah.  The real question is what humans are free to do.  The freedom
> to do something is also the freedom *not* to do something.  The
> freedom to conduct a transaction (employing someone) must also be
> the freedom not to conduct that transaction because the transaction
> is voluntary.
>

Who said humans are free ? Which page is that written on ? Ooops, 
lost my copy. Your version must be wrong. Probably a spelling error.

The _real_ question is HOW to determine what humans are 
free to do. Without a common acceptance of right, wrong and 
definition of freedom, it only comes from the sharp end of a gun. 
Just having a cosy chinwag in Congress, the UN or the European 
Parliament and agreeing on a code of conduct is not enuf if it is not 
accepted by the active parties.

Many people sqeal about rights (and wrongs) but they are only right 
or wrong by some measure. If your enemy has a different measure, or
refuses to accept your right/wrong criteria, you are stuffed.

For some people, that measure is the US Constitution, for others the 
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, etc. However, all of these are 
only ARBITRARY agreements on commonly accepted points of view. If I 
disagree, they are absolutely worthless.

So, but unless you stop me, I'll play by MY set of rules. If I want 
Kuwait, I'll take it. If I  want Grenada, Chekoslovakia, Afghanistan 
or the Marshall Islands, I'll just take it. If I want to tap your 
phone, monitor your Bank account or stamp your licence with 666, I'll 
do it

Oh buts that wrong, u cant do that. Well, who says I cant. You ?? 
Laugh..laugh..laugh. Where does it say that. Did God tell you ? Prove 
it then. No, well POQ.

So if we have a Government OF the people, BY the poeple, FOR the 
people, we may have a chance of getting somewhere. (Oh well, we can 
always hope)

DM
---------------------------
David Magnay
email: sdh@crafti.com.au
---------------------------