RE: virus: Real ethics

Gifford, Nate F (
Mon, 10 Nov 1997 09:41:32 -0500

>David McFadzean wrote
>At 12:24 AM 11/7/97 -0500, Wade T.Smith wrote:

>>If only any portion of the legal system entered the subset of
>>regardless of who's definition or understanding was used,
there may be
>>some foothold for argument here, but, alas, the legal system
>>completely outside any of these constraints.

>Isn't this a bit of an exaggeration?
NO! Where does the law come from???? The law comes from the
legislature ... and since when has the legislature been composed of
"reasonable men"? The legislature is composed of politicians and
statesmen who are good at solving complex non-linear utility functions
for voters ... but in the end the over-riding variable in the function
is their own re-election. When they solve those functions I certainly
wouldn't say they were doing it in a reasonable way ... it is more of an
instinct common in their kind and selected for by the electoral process.

>>I would be hard-pressed to find any legal decision which could
>>with ethical conclusions. There is a real problem of basic
language here.

>People are convicted for murdering and stealing. What is
>about that?

Lets look at Boesky and Keating .... lets compare the magnitude
of their crimes with the other thieves in state and federal prisons.
Particularly those convicted under a "three strikes" law. Lets not
forget Dr. Kevorkian vs. the recurrent elderly husband who kills his
wife or dependent child when he feels he can no longer care for
them....Kevorkian simply has better "legal" advice. The individual
inconsistencies and injustices in the system are myriad. The question
is can our current system alter itself to become fairer and more just?
The answer is obviously yes ... but history shows that these advances
are sporadic and non-rational ... and in fact Meme based!!!!!!!

>I'm not saying that the law is perfect, far from it (which
>is why I brought it up in the first place). But surely there is
>correlation between law and fairness.
How long do you want to talk about WHAT IS FAIR? Which is a
memetic based question? Is it fair to sic the dogs and fire hoses on
the Niggers? Sure until they move from Nigger to person. Surely it was
a meme that caused that transformation. That meme was carried in say
Life magazine ... where initially you see police taking care of some
trouble makers you begin to see the persecution of civil right's
activists. It doesn't hurt that your yankee cousin calls you to ask
what you think ... causing you to move from observer to participant ...
at least at the ballot box.

But once again its obvious that any relative advances in
fairness ... relative to the observer that is ... aren't secure. See
David Duke, Pat Buchanon, and Rush Limbaugh among the many other
examples of people twisting the concept of fairness .. in order to
implement their concept into law.