From: Scott R (jse885@spinn.net)
Date: Thu Jul 03 2003 - 00:42:04 BST
Platt,
Looking at it as a conflict within the social level, between those who think
the state shouldn't interfere with what goes in private (with the usual
qualifications). and those who do, one could, I suppose, make a MOQ case for
the former, in that each person's pursuit of happiness should have the least
amount of restrictions placed on it, thus maximizing DQ.
I would not call the repression of sodomy a case of the social over the
biological. Sex, of any type, obviously has a biological basis, so if it
were a case of the social wanting to tame the biological, why not repress
all sex between any couples now that impregnation can be done without it? By
singling out sodomy, the social system is trying to set rules on social
behavior, not biological. So, again, I see this as a conflict within the
social level, not between levels.
Maybe there is a MOQ argument that, since there seems to be higher
percentage of homosexuals among artists and intellectuals than in the total
population, that they seem to be more open to DQ than most, so why make life
difficult for them?
- Scott
.
> Hi All,
>
> Here in the U.S. the Supreme Court in a 6 to 3 decision recently struck
> down the law in Texas that criminalized sodomy. Being the highest court in
> the land, the decision made similar laws in other states besides Texas
> null and void. In effect, the Court has made the practice of sodomy a
> Constitutional right, superseding all state laws that would say otherwise.
> Critics were quick to point out that nowhere in the Constitution can one
> point to right to sodomy just as one cannot find in that document a
> general right of privacy.
>
> State laws are enacted by representatives of all the people of the state.
> When the Supreme Court makes a ruling, it becomes the law of all states,
> enacted by the number of justices voting to make a majority decision, in
> the case of the right to sodomy, six individuals.
>
> Texas argued that preserving the majority's sense of morality was a
> legitimate state interest. But the Supreme Court disagreed, stating in
> effect that public morality is not a sufficient basis to sustain a law,
> raising the possibility that state laws against bestiality, incest,
> prostitution, and polygamy, enacted for no other reason than to promote
> the majority's moral views, could likewise be overthrown as
> unconstitutional.
>
> Of course, the paradox is that the justices in striking down sodomy laws
> used their own morality. Instead of permitting the public to enforce its
> moral views, the Court has taken upon itself the role of final moral
> arbiter.
>
> Was the Court's decision correct according to the MOQ? Here we see a
> biological value, sodomy, in conflict with a social value (social mores)
> with a bit of intellectual values (individual rights) thrown in.
>
> For myself, I don't see social restrictions against sodomy to be a threat
> to higher intellectual values. And I think the public through its
> democratically elected representatives should be able to establish laws
> that reflect the morals of the majority rather than have a six or seven
> individuals decide such matters, provided intellectual values are not
> obliterated by any state in the process. Finally, keeping lower biological
> forces in check by law is legitimate moral function of society.
>
> But, I could be wrong, and would be most interested to see how you would
> apply MOQ principles to this controversial matter.
>
> Platt
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archives:
> Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> Nov '02 Onward -
http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 03 2003 - 00:52:24 BST