ALS: thoughts on freedom

Australian Libertarian Society Blog

Catallaxy is currently experiencing a server problem…

… Which is why the site has been down all day, and why LP and Troppo are getting swarmed rather badly.

To our regulars and visitors, please bear with us, we are working on it!

October 17, 2006 - Posted by | General

17 Comments

  1. As Seinfeld said to Baboo:

    “The wheels are in motion!”

    Comment by Jason Soon | October 17, 2006

  2. Why dont you guys just move to free wordpress hosting already. Your server goes down every week.

    Comment by yobbo | October 18, 2006

  3. Or even the paid option – it allows you to keep the domain name.

    Comment by ozrisk | October 18, 2006

  4. Whatever you do it would be good to see it back. I’ve been reduced to arguing with marxists.

    Comment by Steve Edney | October 18, 2006

  5. We’re looking at all options, Andrew, but right now we’re focussed on finding a decent server. For a bunch of reasons (too lengthy to go into here), Catallaxy has become very popular over the last 3-4 months – Crikey & news.com.au coverage probably had something to do with it. c8to is working his ringer out to make sure we come up with a solution that means what Yobbo flagged doesn’t happen again!

    Stay Tuned!

    Comment by skepticlawyer | October 18, 2006

  6. I can’t seem to access the blog template, so I’ll just leave this here for now:

    http://www.cis.org.au/policy/spring_06/polspring06_edwards.htm

    Comment by Steve Edwards | October 18, 2006

  7. Steve, I just read your policy piece. Fantastic!! Well done.

    Comment by Sinclair Davidson | October 18, 2006

  8. Steve Edney …

    My god .. you’re quoting Hayek now???

    http://larvatusprodeo.net/2006/10/13/confusing-marx-stalin/#comment-163407

    Bird was right. You’re coming over to the side of sweetness and light and you don’t even know it.

    Comment by Jason Soon | October 18, 2006

  9. He wouldn’t be the first Ed either!

    Comment by Steve Edwards | October 18, 2006

  10. Steve Edwards — write a post you fool! Nice article. Love your work. However, one issue of contention:

    SE: If Christ’s claims are represented accurately by the Gospels, intellectually honest non-Christians can justifiably ponder whether He was a liar, deluded, or mad.

    Why would you (or any intellectually honest non-Christian) assume that JC’s claims are represented accurately by the Gospels? Remember that the gospels were all written well after ol’ JC shuffled off this mortal coil and the gospels authors didn’t even know him. Indeed, there is scant enough evidence that the sly bugger even existed!

    Comment by John Humphreys | October 19, 2006

  11. by “we” they mean their unpaid IT slave is working on it…

    i’m pretty sure catallaxy destroys all of the other blogs in terms of readership and spam received but hopefully the new one will be simple and robust…

    Comment by c8to | October 19, 2006

  12. Steve Edney …

    My god .. you’re quoting Hayek now???

    Well it seemed appropriate. It was also motivated by the fact that I remember Paul Norton saying that Hayeks arguments were influential in making him and others disolve the Communist Part of Australia, so I thought it might be worth a try with LP new resident revolutionary socialist.

    Comment by Steve | October 19, 2006

  13. John – I haven’t assumed anything of the Gospels and their accuracy is not necessary to my argument; which is why I deliberately wrote in the escape clause “If Christ has been represented accurately”. If he hasn’t been represented accurately, then Christianity is obviously worthless – a pack of lies. But if he HAS been represented accurately at least in his claims, then non-Christians surely have every right to inquire into his character.

    Comment by Steve Edwards | October 19, 2006

  14. Steve I thought your article was the best defence of the need to allow freedom to offend religion I have read in a long time. Thanks for writing it.

    I can understand the temptation to legislate against it though, particularly in backward states like India where when religion is criticised, mass riots occur with thousands left dead. Politicians with vote banks in Hindu/Muslim communities find it difficult to point out that reactive violence to unpopular views that would otherwise have been hidden away is unjustifiable, no matter what was said. The fact that we have a religious vilification law in Victoria is baffling, given we have the secular, relatively non-corrupt law enforcement needed to quash such reactive violence.

    Has there been a judgment delivered on the Catch the Fire case?

    Comment by Sukrit Sabhlok | October 19, 2006

  15. LDPers
    My membership form is on its way …

    Comment by Jason Soon | October 19, 2006

  16. How goes the numbers on the LDP membership drive? Will we be able to vote LDP at the next federal election. I might even nominate as a federal candidate if I can have a media profile close to zero and a guarantee that I won’t win.

    Comment by terje (say tay-a) | October 19, 2006

  17. We are now very close to the magic number. We may even have hit it now (could Jason be number 500?) but you’ll have to ask David Leyonhjelm for the exact count. We want to have more than enough to make sure the process goes smoothly… but I am now confident that we will be federally registered in time for the next federal election.

    Terje, it is easy to promise a low profile and a loss. Unfortunately, I can probably promise that even to people who want a high profile and a win! :) In terms of profile and influence — it is only the first senate candidate in a few states that have any sort of chance.

    Now we just need to lure Andrew Norton and Steve Edwards into the fold and we can’t be stopped!

    Comment by John Humphreys | October 19, 2006


Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 100 other followers