home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!rutgers!cmcl2!option!smezias
- From: smezias@option.GBA.NYU.EDU (Stephen J. Mezias)
- Newsgroups: talk.abortion
- Subject: Re: L. L. Bean allows anti-choice candidate to use company property
- Message-ID: <28572@option.GBA.NYU.EDU>
- Date: 14 Aug 92 17:16:52 GMT
- References: <28503@option.GBA.NYU.EDU> <BszDLt.G94@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com>
- Organization: NYU Stern School of Business
- Lines: 29
-
- In article <BszDLt.G94@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com> wreck@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com
- (R. Cage) writes in response to my original post:
-
- >Batting .333 there; at least she's pro-choice on the right of
- >self-defense and firearm recreation.
-
- Last time I checked this was Talk.abortion. On Talk.abortion,
- anti-choice is shorthand for wanting to restrict the right to choose
- abortion. Is that somehow unclear to you?
-
- >Gay rights... I can see that from both sides. I don't like
- >people picking on my friends, but neither do I like goverment
- >mandating that people have to deal with others. If business
- >wants to reject paying customers or good employees, that's
- >stupid, but being stupid shouldn't be a crime.
-
- The government has an interest in civil rights. You seem to have a
- problem with how those have been defined. What alternative definition
- do you propose?
-
- >Now if someone can get her to see that government control of
- >reproduction and the doctor-patient relationship is anathema to
- >the philosophy of limited government, maybe she'll come around.
-
- I doubt it. The profile of her in the NY Times suggests a foaming at
- the mouth Buchananite. I find that this kind of philosophy shares
- little with libertarianism.
-
- SJM
-