Hi Rick
On 2 Mar 99, at 15:39, Richard Budd wrote:
> "If the system should err, it should err on the side of individual
> rights." Thus our nation's legal presumption of innocence which is IMHO a
> righteous policy. However, I don't think the MoQ would agree with our
> forefathers descision to always give individuals the benefit of the doubt.
> An entire society is at a higher level of evolution than a single person.
> The MoQ tells us that society must control biology in order to maintain
> its own existence.
> Would I be wrong in thinking that the MoQ would
> endorse a "guilty until proven innocent" presumption over an "innocent
> until proven guilty" presumption?
I would have thought that the MOQ would support "innocent until proven guilty" as part
of the notion of justice created by intellectual value. The right to justice is an
intellectual
right and as such is of higher value than the social value which may wish to presume
an
individual "guilty until proven innocent". This is one reason why the right to trial
by jury
and judgement by your peers is so important in most western nations. Although the
mechanism and implementation is apparent at a social level the value that precedes it
is
intellect.
Anyone else?
Horse
MOQ Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
