It is ok to do anything one wants to do

[madokie]

as long as it doesn't infringe upon anothers right to do the same, it causes no one pain. is that insane

[Ezlivin]

1. What's wrong with personal liberty?

Or are you responding to a quote from some government official?

I believe strongly in "do no harm" while you exercise your civil liberties. Is there a problem with that?

[madokie]

3. no just sitting here thinking, wanting to start a dialog of whats right and whats wrong is all

whats acceptable, whats not. just typing

[Ezlivin]

5. "Ain't Nobody's Business if You Do"

"The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes in a Free Society" by Peter McWilliams was a very good read.

Publisher's Weekly said "Obsessed with a personal freedom that some would consider license, McWilliams ( How to Survive the Loss of a Love ) here contends that consensual crimes--those involving drugs, gambling, sex and unusual religious practices, among them--should be allowed if they do not physically harm others or their property. In this overlong, diffuse but often entertaining book, studded with illustrations and quotations from the likes of Elvis Presley and Saint Augustine, the author argues that not only are our constitutional rights violated by punishment for such crimes, but that enforcing ineffectual, costly laws results in the needless jailing of thousands each year, and yield suffering and social discrimination for many harmless non-conformists. Meanwhile, he wrongfully claims, violence, robbery and corruption go largely unpunished. Citing historical precedents and extensively analyzing the Bible, McWilliams calls for a "politics of change" that would separate law from religion and morality, and that would honor diversity."

[mondo joe]

2. I'm pro choice. And not only with regard to abortion.

It's all the same principle to me. It's your body - do what you like to it.

[madokie]

4. I'm Pro Choice period

you be you I be me

[mondo joe]

6. I'm amazed that a board so strongly pro-choice on abortion can be such

busybodies about other choices of conscience.

[Philosoraptor]

7. Let's ask the president.

He seems to think, 'if it feels good, do it', just like he said about those dirty hippies when he was campaigning.

Only thousands of innocent people are dying in bush's case.

But to the question, I think basically the anwer is a libertarian yes.

[madokie]

8. if there was ever an example of if it feels good do it it would be the little one

hands down he's the tops.
I don't mean to belittle small people only little men such as *

[Ron Green]

9. "Harm" is open to interpretation.

Sucking up lots of fossil fuels is freedom to some, harmful to others.

What about non-stop shopping for injection-molded junk from China?

Smoking 2 packs of cigarettes a day?

Creating the same porno movie over and over?

"Causing pain" is a complex issue, because there are short- and long-term consequences of everything we do, even if they're not understood right away.

[madokie]

10. So true

[ProfessorGAC]

11. Well, I'll Say The Harm Should Not Be Tangential

Harm can be measured. We do it all the time.

If it's impact on others is not measurable, if it's not direct toward another, there is no tangential aspect, but rather IS, immediate and obvious, then interpretation isn't necessary.

I steal your car. The harm is measurable and obvious. There's nothing tangential about it. My smoking a cigar in my own car in a different state than you would require a pretty wide tangent of logic to call harm.

So, i think your desciption is intentionally and unnecessarily oblique.
The Professor

[Ron Green]

12. I'm not giving a description, I'm simply asserting that harm is complex

and not always immediately understood. The theft of the car is of course measurable and the harm from theft has been understood for thousands of years. The burning of fossil fuels, though, is something whose harm has only been understood recently.

When you smoke your cigar in your car, you have to consider the potential harm to your health (and the resale value of your car), as well as the pleasure you get from the cigar, which is worth something to you, not to mention the economic benefit to the cigar maker, tobacco grower, etc.

All I'm saying is that the complexity of the issue of harm is worth examining, and for people to simply shout "liberty" obscures the need for policy-makers to look at the increasing complexity of systems that sustain 6 billion people on this planet.

[mondo joe]

13. That's why "harm" is a poor term for such a definition. "Violation of rights"

might be better.

[TahitiNut]

14. Do people have "duties"?

What are people obliged to do? Under what conditions? Are parents "free" to abandon their children? Is a sperm donor obliged to support unwanted children? (Is that "involuntary servitude"?) Are there 'duties' of citizenship?

After all, what 'right' does government have to impose its will on parents? citizens?