Your comment is right on that rights should be interpreted as a guide to values. Since none of the 'rights' established in the US Constitution has been totally immune to limitation, I think it's extrememly clear that we have been using our notions of individual rights as the basis of an ethical framework.
That being said, I think the fact that the administrators of the site continued to maintain it after even the first violent incident is unconscionable. Exposing these doctors for public embarassment, ridicule, or even protest is one thing, but what sane person wants to be party to execution??
If we want to talk about social sickness, the lack of social responsibility is far more frightening than having your speech limited. These people are like children complaining that their parents broke a promise, without acknowledging that maybe it was because they broke an obvious rule. Rights only apply so far as someone has the sense to use them correctly, and these children should have known better.
Slashdot Mirror
Your comment is right on that rights should be interpreted as a guide to values. Since none of the 'rights' established in the US Constitution has been totally immune to limitation, I think it's extrememly clear that we have been using our notions of individual rights as the basis of an ethical framework. That being said, I think the fact that the administrators of the site continued to maintain it after even the first violent incident is unconscionable. Exposing these doctors for public embarassment, ridicule, or even protest is one thing, but what sane person wants to be party to execution?? If we want to talk about social sickness, the lack of social responsibility is far more frightening than having your speech limited. These people are like children complaining that their parents broke a promise, without acknowledging that maybe it was because they broke an obvious rule. Rights only apply so far as someone has the sense to use them correctly, and these children should have known better.