Re: [asa] on the common good, and science

*But it can be responsible public policy to take things away from people for
the common good.*

Agreed. The idea that government regulation should never deprive people of
*anything* is not sustainable even under a strong libertarian framework;
even libertarians recognize that an individual can be deprived of liberty or
property to prevent a greater harm to the liberty or property of others. I
would go even further and argue that the more nuanced libertarian principle
-- government should not deprive people of anything that isn't clearly
harmful to others, even if it might be harmful to the user -- is not always
sustainable either. Curiously, however, liberals tend to be communitarian
when it comes to economic regulation but libertarian when it comes to
anything relating to sexuality (such as porn and abortion), while mainstream
conservates tend to flip these poles.

On 1/26/07, Ted Davis <TDavis@messiah.edu> wrote:
> Nice work, Rich, to locate the author of this statement:
>
> "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."
>
> I am not going to get into a debate about tax cuts (apparently the context
> for this statement by Senator Clinton); this isn't the place for that.
But
> I caution Janice or anyone else, from using something like this as a
"litmus
> test" for the credibility of a scientist or anyone else.
>
> Let's use history of science--well, medicine actually--to illustrate the
> point.
>
> In the 19th century, opium use was legal in most places in the USA, unless
> you were Chinese. I kid you not, Chinese immigrants and their communities
> were singled out by laws in certain places (such as California) making
opium
> useage illegal for them, and only for them. I won't get into all the
> subtleties of this particular form of racist legislation. Opium however
> wasn't seen as medically dangerous at the time. Even heroin was a common
> ingredient of "Patent medicines," and as some may recall cocaine was part
of
> the mix for the original Coca-cola recipe.
>
> When medical knowledge changed, however, when it became clear just how
> addictive and dangerous this stuff was, things were taken away from people
> for the common good. That's pretty much exactly what happened.
>
> The policy issue is quite different from the science issue--in that case
> and in global warming today. But it can be responsible public policy to
> take things away from people for the common good. Just as it can be
> reasonably debated, whether or not a certain thing (money, submachine
guns,
> opium, cigars, transfatty acids, hand grenades, Hummers, child
pornography,
> Richard Dawkins' books) belongs in that category.
>
> This is not a case of "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead."
>
> Ted
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

-- 
David W. Opderbeck
Web:  http://www.davidopderbeck.com
Blog:  http://www.davidopderbeck.com/throughaglass.html
MySpace (Music):  http://www.myspace.com/davidbecke
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.