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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KonKilo who wrote (69529)	5/31/2008 12:14:13 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 542110

Breaking laws for social justice is a little different than breaking laws the constitution sets forth which regulate the coercive power of the government. Oppressive laws you can (perhaps) justify breaking for social justice. Breaking the protections of the constitution sets you on the road to dictatorship, or some other unpalatable form of government. Those are the divisions I see.

To: KonKilo who wrote (69529)	5/31/2008 7:00:06 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 542110

But he was still breaking a law. No he wasn't. Not really. Those flag rules showed up in a "law" only because Congress has no other place to put such things. While it's technically in a law, it's not really a law as ordinary people understand law. Ordinary laws prescribe or proscribe certain actions and establish penalties for non-compliance. Civil disobedience breaks real laws, those for which there is a penalty. Crediting Obama with civil disobedience for breaking what is not a real law is a bit much. If it's civil disobedience, it's only so on a technicality. So while one may applaud or condemn civil disobedience, this ain't an example of it.