On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 00:03:43 +0100, ess (phil hunt)
wrote:

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 15:48:08 +0100, Greg Hennessy wrote:
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 14:58:48 +0100, ess (phil hunt)
wrote:


I vehemently disagree, privacy is a fundamental human right.

If I do something illegal, do I have a fundamental human right for
others not to find out?

That's a logical fallacy.

What is?

The false dilemma you constructed above.


What about if I do something that's not illegal, but which many
people would be concerned about if they knew it? Do they have a
right to know?

If its none of their damned business they have *no* right to know, no
matter how 'concerned' these interfering busybodies may be.

Ah, but how do you decide who has a "right" to know?

Its not for *me* to decide. Its none of my business period.

No, I don't know it; AFAICT that's what you meant. To clarify, let
me ask you:

[Snip another false dilemma]

It's not a dilemma, it's a genuine attempt to find out what you
think on the subject. Evidently you don't want to tell me; possibly
you don't want to have to work out what your opinions actually
entail.

My opinions on the subject are as plain as the nose on your face. Govts do
*not* have the right to pry using 'the innocent have nothing to fear' as an
excuse.


You cannot claim that campaign contributions are morally equivalent to the
corrupt taking of bribes and overt attempts to destroy evidence and any
attempt at investigation of it.

Maybe I can, and maybe I can't -- I can think of lots of arguments
both ways; but that's rather beside the point since I wasn't
claiming such a thing in the first place.

Oh yes you were, your elaborately constructed 2nd fallacy was clearly
drawing an equivalence between the two.





greg

--
$ReplyAddress =~ s#\@.*$##; # Delete everything after the '@'
The Following is a true story.....
Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty.