Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Defense of Liberty: Libertarianism and the Public Square
Free Republic ^ | January 20, 2002 | Annalex

Posted on 01/20/2002 2:12:45 PM PST by annalex

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-96 last
To: annalex
Disruption of speech is violation of rights. Nondisruptive speech is a right.

Oh, cut it out, annalex. Tell me when it ain't so. By and large, the language of rights is a matter of law and legislation; the legalization of social life is a disruption of speech.

81 posted on 01/25/2002 3:03:09 PM PST by cornelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: cornelis
Of course not. Good legislation follows natural law. Natural law is all about rights.
82 posted on 01/27/2002 4:28:55 PM PST by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: annalex
Good legislation follows natural law.

This does not speak to the issue cornelis raises, and that is that "good legislation" is a disruption of free speech by interference or restriction.

83 posted on 01/28/2002 6:13:24 AM PST by Nebullis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Nebullis; cornelis
A legislation that follows natural rights would ban speech that violates rights.

In addition to speech that disrupts rightful speech, offensive to the community standard speech is also not rightful as my article argues; that, too, can be banned.

You can't call such bans "disruption of speech" unless you are interested is punsterism. Normally, the word "disruption" is reserved for prevention of activity that is positive in some sense. We don't say "police disrupted a robbery".

84 posted on 01/28/2002 7:43:00 AM PST by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: annalex
Just discovered a hot Ayn Rand thread, complete with audios of some objectivism lectures:

Ayn Rand books & objectivism lectures.

85 posted on 01/28/2002 11:32:50 AM PST by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: annalex, cornelis
Normally, the word "disruption" is reserved for prevention of activity that is positive in some sense.

That's the way in which you use it, yes. Normally, the word "disruption" means a break from the normal flow or order of things. And that can be positive or negative. "Disruptive innovation", for instance, is positive.

However, I can see why you bristle at cornelis' suggestion.

86 posted on 01/28/2002 12:01:59 PM PST by Nebullis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: annalex
Good legislation follows natural law. Natural law is all about rights.

I can walk with the first one. The last one is a hoot.

87 posted on 01/28/2002 3:28:01 PM PST by cornelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: cornelis
a hoot

From Aquinas, (on his feast day):

Law is a rule and measure of acts, whereby man is induced to act or is restrained from acting.
(Source:Pursuit of Liberty: Question 90. The essence of law )

Righfulness is an attribute of acts.

88 posted on 01/28/2002 5:55:22 PM PST by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Thank you. It frustrates me how little of Rand is available online in text form.
89 posted on 01/28/2002 5:56:24 PM PST by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: annalex
If A is B and B is C and C is D and D is E and E is F . . . then Eureka! F is A!

So much for the poem I learned in college, "It all depends on the red wheel barrow . . . "

But what if B follows A . . .

90 posted on 01/28/2002 6:31:45 PM PST by cornelis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: cornelis
Cool.
91 posted on 01/28/2002 6:59:58 PM PST by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: annalex
oooo.... good article

I'll give it a more thorough reading later. One should also consider that when you eliminate ALL content in the public square you are making a statement, i.e. NO religious display IS a religious statement. It is not possible for the public square to be absent (or neutral) of content. No content speaks volumes.

JW

92 posted on 01/28/2002 7:27:13 PM PST by JWinNC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JWinNC
No content speaks volumes

Heavy and empty ones.

93 posted on 01/28/2002 7:49:18 PM PST by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: annalex
Bump!
94 posted on 01/30/2002 5:17:07 PM PST by KingNo155
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: annalex

Keep-alive bump.

I thought these little things of mine were gone forever.


95 posted on 01/28/2010 6:29:34 PM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: annalex

keep-alive bump


96 posted on 09/03/2019 5:45:53 AM PDT by annalex (fear them not)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-96 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson