Quote:
|
Quote by: Osborn F Enready Once again, here we are talking about perfecting society through the use of gene manipulation. What makes you sick people tick, anyway? What could possibly make you think we all want the same things from life? Violence is a valuable assett in this life, and as long as anger exists, violence will exist. You assume all violence is unfounded, and not just. While I implore senseless violence, I relish the thought of being turned loose on those who have sought to dismantle my Constitution, for the explicit intent of performing violence, because in my eyes violence is the only way to enact justice for the crimes that have removed the rights, liberty and life of so many people.
While I of course wouldn't do this without public endorsement (due process, legal authority )under normal circumstances, should revolution break out, you would see me with an assault rifle and a smile as I drove/marched/jogged/limped/crawled to Washington. |
Are you a Christian, Osborn? If you are or aren't makes no difference to me, I make no moral judgements based on your choice of spirituality, I only ask as a matter of judging your level of ethical consistancy. Because the attitude implied in this section of your post is in complete opposition to Christian Teaching, or rather, the teachings of Christ. It indicates a level of anger than I believe most would consider unhealthy and I wonder at it's origins.
Quote:
|
Quote by: Osborn F Enready I depise utopic thinking, when people talk about making it effect MY LAWS. |
Do you always exhibit this same level of possesiveness towards public policy. The laws govern and protect you, but they do not
belong[u] to you. If, in the democratic republic you call home, duly constituted authorities pass legislation that changes the law, (
the law, not your law, it is not yours), you have an obligation as a citizen to obey those laws. You do also have the right to protest those laws and should you chose to accept the consequence, you may have a moral obligation to civil disobidience, but I know of no thinking party who would suggest, that in a democratic society that is opperating within the confines of the definition of said society, you have the right to armed usurption of the laws because you do not like them.