: Piper: Well Lark, there IS a serious relationship between the criminal law and religion- much of the moraility of the church forms the foundation of the criminal law (See Devlin, the enforcement of morals or for the contrary HLA Hart).
It's funny you should say that because someone else has recommended that I read Devlin and I'm getting some of his material from the Uni library next week, I've got a book here called 'the struggle to be human: Crime, criminology and anarchism' by L.Tift and D. Sullivan (I could get you a copy, I've got a cheap supplier, e-mail me at gerarddonaghy@Hotmail.com) the trouble is that it's a bit on the 'post-capitalism there will be no crime because on the eve of the revolution there will be a total change in the individual' side of things.
What I really need is something that reflects the reality of the matter aswell as the importance of a libertarian perspective.
: Piper: I hope that 'hat' is a fez or something similary eccentric (bowler hat perhaps)- I would hate to think you're roaming around in one of those perverse baseball caps.
Well the black beret is popularly associated with IRA so I have to opt for the baseball cap, corporate logo and all, I'm tempted to get a real insane hat though for the badness and wear it towards the end of term.
: BTW I can't believe you support eugenics...
I view eugenics in a very, very different light from other people, especially other eugenicists, who in my opinion are either proto-nazi's or fit in a dangerously authoritarian 'social good' camp.
I what I understand as eugenics is a program of total bio-medical health and safe natural genetics conducted in an open manner that aims at improving things for the individual primarily and benefiting the social good as a consequence.
When I made the assertion that eugenics would benefit society in class, everyone was horrified but then I discribed that what I considered eugenics wasnt mass programs of sterilisation but rather conscious use of voluntary conraception etc. they cooled a little, that may be an indication of some kind of ingrained but unconsiouse libertarianism there, which could be only good.