SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: aladin who wrote (67279)9/5/2004 5:40:56 PM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (1) of 793903
 
Yes I do.

Thanks for your response. I wish you would elaborate on your rationale.

By your logic Puerto Rican separatists would be free to hunt you and your children.

Didn't mean to provoke that inference. Just because something is not absolutely wrong doesn't mean it's absolutely right or that we need to tolerate it. It only means that there may be scenarios where it's the best of bad alternatives and may be acceptable.

Lying isn't absolutely wrong, either. It's perfectly acceptable to almost everyone to lie for a good enough cause--to save a life, for example. That does not mean that lying is, in general, a good thing, only that it's not absolutely wrong.

Puerto Rican separatists wouldn't have a leg to stand on, IMO. In the first place, there is an democratic authority in place to resolve such disputes. There would be no excuse for anyone to resort to terrorism in that environment. In the second place, there's no way that such terrorism would ever get them what they want. Useless violence is never justified. I don't know of any current situation where I would approve terrorism. I think that terrorism by the victims in Sudan against their oppressors might be understandable but it wouldn't be feasible or effective so it would be wrong, IMO.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext