Re: Fields of Endeavor (was Re: [Fwd: Intent to package: pm3])

[David Starner <dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org>]

At 03:06 AM 8/2/99 -0400, Mike Goldman wrote:
>Cannot the DFSG be considered in similar terms - that an arbitrary
restriction
>upon liberty of use must be disqualifying, yet a restriction for the
purpose of
>ensuring respect for life and property may be not only allowed but in certain
>cases even encouraged?

Okay, but going back to the case of the communist, he may be quick to point
out that his restriction on capitalist use is merely ensuring respect for
life and property, as capitalism is the ultimate destroyer there of. My
position is that restricting military use is not respecting life and
property, as the nature of our universe is that force is the ultimate
protector of those. I also wouldn't agree with your primary values of life
and property, personally placing free will as the ultimate value - if you
want to kill Bob, it's all right as long as you get Bob's permission first. 

So what it comes down to is that adding a loophole based on _your_ morality
to the DFSG. Unlike you, I still don't see any difference between you
adding a restriction for the purpose of ensuring respect for (human?) life
and property, and me adding a restriction to prohibit it being used for
coercive purposes, and a Jew adding restrictions to prohibt it being used
for non-kosher purposes.
--
David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org (alternately dvdeug@hotmail.com)
"I would weep, but my tears have been stolen; I would shout, but my voice
has been taken. Thus, I write." - Tragic Poet