I'm sorry, but I am missing your issue over my using
anti-Semitism as an example of prejudice. You're gonna have to do
more than hint. I don't get it.
You wrote:
"I don't agree but the argument can rationally be made."
That is not logical. If you don't agree, then you don't agree
that the argument is rational. Saying that, one would have a very
difficult time figuring out on which side of the fence you
reside.
-Mark
************
{American jurors have complete Constitutional authority to vote
"not guilty" based on nothing more than a disagreement with the
case, no matter the evidence - despite the judge's instructions.
There is absolutely no obligation to vote "guilty" to arrive at a
unanimous verdict. Get on a jury, stand your ground, and fulfill
its other main purpose: to counteract abusive government and
unjust lawsuits.
See www.fija.org
[Please adopt this as your own signature.] }
---------------------
You just happened to pick the example of an anti-semite
because...hmmm...why did you pick it?
Please try harder.
Although I don't support anti-drug laws I can easily see how an
argument can be made for them.
To wit:
Drugs promise pleasure without harm and are marketed as such.
Such claims are untrue.
Therefore the claims are fraudulent.
Therefore it is not a violation of the NAP to forbid selling
drugs.
I don't agree but the argument can rationally be made.
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "Libertarian" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
