RE: Redefining violence (contains possibly POLITICAL material)

From: Lee Corbin (lcorbin@tsoft.com)
Date: Wed Mar 26 2003 - 19:30:41 MST

  • Next message: Lee Corbin: "RE: [WAR/IRAQ] American POW's"

    Greg had written

    > > > You're right - I don't need to see the ads. Sometimes I might need to
    > > > watch TV, say, to get crucial emergency information. But why is this just
    > > > about needs? Why can't I choose to drive along the familiar highways of my
    > > > neighborhood without seeing billboards, or even particular billboards?

    So it's obvious that he's implying that he ought to
    have some kind of right *not* to see billboards.

    So I asked

    > > Just to clarify things for me, why would you say that
    > > I should have to see ugly people when I drive around?

    and you write

    > You're "forced" to... although perhaps a Libertarian
    > could suggest you could ALWAYS put your eyes out...

    which really doesn't address the question in the total
    context. Do you maintain that billboards on private
    property that happen to be within sight of highways
    (just as distant mountains are within sight), should
    be restricted in what appears on them?

    (I'm *not* yet taking a stance here. I just want you
    to clarify your position by considering a *perhaps*
    parallel question.)

    Why is one forced to look at people one considers ugly
    and is not forced (I guess!?) to look at unappealing
    billboards?

    Thanks,
    Lee

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Mar 26 2003 - 19:31:31 MST