Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
International Politics
Real ‘thought police’?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Quid est Veritas?" data-source="post: 75234510" data-attributes="member: 385144"><p>The law is awfully vague. Vague laws tend to gradually be expanded to cover more and more ground, such as with Euthanasia law and their 'intractable suffering' till depressed teenagers could be killed in Belgium. I don't think this will end well, therefore.</p><p></p><p>The only defence would be to fall back on Common Law when run afoul of it, and that just means whether the courts interpret precedent or the new proscriptive legislation as being paramount in that case. It will give far too much ambiguity, and a lot would depend on how and in what tradition it gets interpreted.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Quid est Veritas?, post: 75234510, member: 385144"] The law is awfully vague. Vague laws tend to gradually be expanded to cover more and more ground, such as with Euthanasia law and their 'intractable suffering' till depressed teenagers could be killed in Belgium. I don't think this will end well, therefore. The only defence would be to fall back on Common Law when run afoul of it, and that just means whether the courts interpret precedent or the new proscriptive legislation as being paramount in that case. It will give far too much ambiguity, and a lot would depend on how and in what tradition it gets interpreted. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Politics
International Politics
Real ‘thought police’?
Top
Bottom