On Sun, 13 May 2007 18:08:30 CDT, Brian Loe said: > I'm not in favor of giving up my rights for ANY purpose, btw. I don't > have the right to live worry free.
A common test of any new communications protocol (and also for religious, moral, and ethical systems) is "Does it successfully interoperate with itself?". A society where *everybody* refuses to give up *any* rights is demonstrably non-self-interoperable. As a thought experiment, what happens if *everybody* insists on having property rights in their possessions, the right to take other's property, the right to carry lethal weaponry to defend the first two rights, *and* the right to keep living. You can't fulfill all of those all the time for everybody. So *somebody* will have to give up *some* right. After all, a lot of us are calling for infringing the rights of the Republican party to bring themselves the freedoms they want for themselves: http://assimilatedpress.blogspot.com/2007/05/10-out-of-10-democrats-hate-freedom.html
pgpsSPTt1TuEG.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
