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 : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Solon who wrote (45145)	2/9/2006 1:41:19 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 90947

Well, that would make you right, wouldn't it?? Yup. But that's hardly surprising or unusual. Its not like you go around saying you are wrong all the time. Well, that would put you above the law, wouldn't it? Depends on what you mean by above the law. I am subject penalties if I violate the law. In that sense I am not above the law. But YOU will determine what is a violation and NOT the law of "we the people"--RIGHT? Yes I will determine what I think is a violation. Neither the constitution nor statue law nor judicial decisions, nor the political process is infallible or inherently just. It was illegal for people to hide Jews from the Nazis. That doesn't mean that doing so violated the German people or anyone else. Yes this is a rather extreme case, but all that is needed is one extreme case to show that what is law is not necessarily what is right, and that violating the law is not automatically wrong. On the other side of the equation owning slaves was legal in a large part of the US before the Civil War. It was legal but it was still a violation of the slaves. A just nation will have some degree of correspondence between what is unjust and what is illegal, but no government will ever be perfect. On a relative basis I think the US does a great job, but that doesn't mean it couldn't be much better. When you break the law, you violate the integrity of the law and the rights and freedoms of other people whom have agreed not to place themselves above the law and thereby not to condemn society to the survival of the most cunning and vicious. That is the core of our disagreement. We have a rather fundamental disagreement here. When people decide to make their own laws (as you apparently feel entitled to do), then there is no objective law left. There is simply the law of claw, fang, and talon--the morality of the bear, the wolf, and the vulture. But go for it, Tim. Break whatever laws you don't like--keeping in mind that you must consider the risk (as you said) of getting caught. Go for it. Not accepting the idea that breaking the law is automatically an attack against society does not require you to break any law, or to support the idea that breaking the law is a good thing even if you can get away with it. Tim