Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (134625)	5/27/2004 4:39:10 PM
From: longnshort	Respond to of 281500

I'd make him the democrat Presidential Nominee

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (134625)	5/27/2004 4:48:34 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

No, because greater issues of policy are involved, but I'd appreciate him as a man who'd followed his conscience at a great personal price and I'd admire him for that. How would you feel about him?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (134625)	5/27/2004 11:25:50 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 281500

Nadine, individual conscience always takes precedence over rule of law. Rule of law is just the collectivist expression of generally accepted [or dictator enforced] idea of what should be law. In the event that individual conscience conflicts with rule of law, there is automatically a civil war of greater or lesser extent. Usually, where laws are expressions of popular will, the individual or group who disagree are trivial, so the degree of civil war involves a minor skirmish. When there's a large disagreement about what should be law, we get Watts riots and often enough, the law is changed to recognize the revised collective conscience. There's nothing intrinsically good about the rule of law. It's just the best bumbling way of running the railroad which is essentially mob rule via democracy. In the case of the "honour killing", in our rule of law, the bastard goes down for the count. If in another political system, he had the numbers and majority rule dictated that "honour killing" was indeed the official law, then the individual conscience boot would be on the other foot. Those not killing their daughter because of individual conscience would be criminal and go down for the count. We are currently in a global civil war, World War III, with reactionary forces wanting to bring back the Islamic Jihad version of the Spanish Inquisition with burning of witches at the stake and heresy trials combined with boiling in oil and amputation of body parts, including heads, according to priestly command. Which doesn't suit my individual conscience, so I'm all for breaking the law of Islam. I quite like my daughters. I hope my side has the numbers, strength and perseverance. Mqurice PS: You can stop kneeling in apology for misleading parliament - be grateful we don't have stonings in SI.