In a message dated 4/23/00 1:12:43 AM Central Daylight Time,
philosborn@hotmail.com writes:
> I then asked around among the people I know who are law
> buffs, and they were all aware in considerably more detail, it seemed, of
> the same material, although some of them probably fit the categories you
> indicated, for sure. But then, Hitler liked dogs...
I didn't mean to suggest that the text hadn't at one time been considered as
an amendment to the Constitution, but rather that the interpretation seemed
far-fetched. In the context of the period between the two wars with Britain,
it seems perfectly understandable.
In a message dated 4/23/00 2:43:04 AM Central Daylight Time,
retroman@turbont.net writes:
> Keep in mind Greg, that at that point in history, there had been the big
> anti-mason reactions IIRC.
Again, with respect, so? Holding a title within an organization (such as the
masons) couldn't be the target of the proposed text, since "President" and
"Congressman" would also have been outlawed in such a case.
> Frankly I wouldn't mind if there were
> anti-trust actions taken against the bar.
As I wrote before, I'm deeply ambivalent about the state sanctioning of the
bar. On the other hand, as Zero Powers (Austin's little brother?) pointed
out, there's plenty of competition among lawyers (don't I know it!). There's
certainly little or no price effect, as law schools compete like hell for
entrants and there's been plenty of downward pressure on legal fee rates
these last ten years. I can assure you that there's no collusion to support
prices. Poor people may well be underserved by the bar, but I don't know
that allowing anyone to hold themselves out as a lawyer would cure that.
Greg Burch <GBurch1@aol.com>----<gburch@lockeliddell.com>
Attorney ::: Vice President, Extropy Institute ::: Wilderness Guide
http://users.aol.com/gburch1 -or- http://members.aol.com/gburch1
ICQ # 61112550
"We never stop investigating. We are never satisfied that we know
enough to get by. Every question we answer leads on to another
question. This has become the greatest survival trick of our species."
-- Desmond Morris
{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}{}
In a message dated 4/18/00 4:33:30 AM Central Daylight Time,
charlie@antipope.org writes:
> One other thing weirds people over here out about the US; it's the
assumption
> that natural rights exist. But that's another matter. (In general, there
> are two concepts of rights. One is that 'nature' somehow assigns certain
> rights to human beings, and those rights exist almost in a platonic sense;
> they're real things and you can't abolish or add to them. Another
philosophy
> of rights is that rights are an emergent phenomenon, that comes from people
> behaving towards each other as they themselves would like to be dealt with;
> your right to life is the corollary of my refraining from killing you. This
> view of rights is that they're all essentially social constructs, and while
> they're desirable and necessary they're in no way automatic.)
My (emerging and evolving) view of rights might be seen as a third
alternative, synthesized from these two. I don't see rights as having some
platonic or supernatural "reality", but I think they are by no means
arbitrary social constructs and therefore may well be seen to be "automatic"
in the sense you seem to use the word above. In my view, rights ARE an
emergent phenomenon, but they are inherent in the fabric of social
interaction. Thus certain fundamental principles of liberty and autonomy, as
well as some aspects of "fairness" and "transparency" are aspects of any
creative and satisfying social order. It's obviously possible to create
human social orders which thwart these rights, just as its possible to design
and build an engine that has high friction and low energy efficiency. But a
study of society will INEVITABLY lead to such a high valuation of liberty,
individual autonomy, fairness and transparency that we will come to value
them as "rights", just as a study of mechanics will cause us to value low
friction and energy efficiency as fundamental design values.
Greg Burch <GBurch1@aol.com>----<gburch@lockeliddell.com>
Attorney ::: Vice President, Extropy Institute ::: Wilderness Guide
http://users.aol.com/gburch1 -or- http://members.aol.com/gburch1
ICQ # 61112550
"We never stop investigating. We are never satisfied that we know
enough to get by. Every question we answer leads on to another
question. This has become the greatest survival trick of our species."
-- Desmond Morris
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:09:44 MDT