Re: Banning morphological freedom

From: Christian Weisgerber (naddy@mips.inka.de)
Date: Wed Apr 02 2003 - 07:21:20 MST

Next message: John K Clark: "Re: Ad Hominem fallacy again"

Previous message: Harvey Newstrom: "RE: Ad Hominem fallacy again"
In reply to: Anders Sandberg: "Banning morphological freedom"
Next in thread: Ramez Naam: "RE: Banning morphological freedom"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Anders Sandberg <asa@nada.kth.se> wrote:

> Here is somthing to sink your teeth into:
> http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/showcase/chi-0303300294mar30.story
> On legislature's plate: Banning forked tongues

Actually, it proposes to outlaw the surgery to fork tongues, not
forked tongues in themselves.

So what's new? According to the rec.arts.bodyart FAQ, tattooing
is illegal in Oklahoma and South Carolina. Just your usual American
social conservatives at work.

-- 
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber                          naddy@mips.inka.de

Next message: John K Clark: "Re: Ad Hominem fallacy again"
Previous message: Harvey Newstrom: "RE: Ad Hominem fallacy again"
In reply to: Anders Sandberg: "Banning morphological freedom"
Next in thread: Ramez Naam: "RE: Banning morphological freedom"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 02 2003 - 07:38:37 MST