Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward
Sorry, I didn't think I was name-calling anybody.
|
You weren't... I wasn't directing that (or any of my comments) directly at you, Ralph. Just at the general discussion of laws vs privacy, and obliquely at some of the people who have given such absolute positions and thereby fogged over many useful discussions.
I realize people have become gun-shy about changes to laws and rights... even in the best of situations, in every country, they should always be concerned about such changes. However, people also have to understand that times change, and sometimes, laws and
even rights have to change to accommodate that. It's not that the change is desired... but that it is deemed to be
needed, and it might be the only fair way to deal with an issue today that wasn't an issue yesterday. People have to be able to recognize when a law or change of rights is needed, and to be able to accept that, even if it is not preferable to them personally.
They also have to be able to accept that it might not be the right time to change laws or rights to accommodate something new, and that they may need to change their own plans, even if it is not preferable to them personally. (Here, I'm referring to people like me.)
We should not be making uninformed, unconsidered decisions. They should all be carefully deliberated, perhaps by much more intelligent than we, in order to develop workable and reasonable practices. We should be engaged in debate, not personal attack. And we should keep our focus on the goal, lest we allow it to get lost in the details.
I don't expect everyone else to just roll over and agree with me. That's why I set this as a discussion of a possible alternative, and not a statement of something that "will work, 'cause I'm brilliant, so just do it and shaddap!"
I work for consensus.