Leave a comment

danieldwilliam January 13 2016, 13:11:14 UTC
Mmmh, statutory rape turns out to be a bit problematic doesn't it ( ... )

Reply

bart_calendar January 13 2016, 15:21:30 UTC
Well, if you want to just get into a debate over whether Bowie was a criminal or not, he certainly was. But he was breaking lots and lots of laws ( ... )

Reply

danieldwilliam January 13 2016, 15:29:42 UTC
I don't doubt that he's done worse things (both things that I consider worse and which society considers worse) than the statutory rape that is the subject of discussion.

And you're probably right that the motivation of the people getting very excited about it is not a clean and clear love of justice and jurisprudence.

Personally, I'd be more concerned about the moral implication of kicking down doors whilst high or toting guns around whilst at the same time thinking that still doesn't put him beyond the pale (or at least my pale) completely.

Drugs laws start to push against my boundary of legimate laws. I think they are illiberal and unnecessarily restrictive and I think the process used to lobby for their creation and retention is perhaps corrupt enough to make those laws illegimate.

Reply

steer January 13 2016, 19:19:20 UTC
Instead people are focused on what legally was considered the least serious law he broke. Because it's the most clear moral transgression. The law is not germane here, it's whether what he did was actually pretty messed up ( ... )

Reply

nickys January 13 2016, 21:55:11 UTC
One of the things that really bugs me about this and similar situations, is that people seem to think that in order to like Bowie's music (or remain friends with somebody who has done something questionable) they should argue that what he did wasn't wrong ( ... )

Reply

brixtonbrood January 13 2016, 23:58:22 UTC
I'll say this for being a Wagnerian - it trains you to be really really good at these distinctions.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up