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 : Clinton's Scandals: Is this corruption the worst ever? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: PiMac who wrote (12270)	5/9/1999 6:42:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13994

PiMac: Of course people have consciences independent of the law, and may be correct in a given instance. But the law becomes meaningless if we get to pick and choose which of its injunctions suits us, which is why it is almost always wrong to break the law without a willingness to pay the consequences. Even civil disobedience involves a willingness to pay the consequences by paying a fine or spending time in jail, by the way.... I do not see what higher principle was being upheld by Clinton in evading his obligations to the court. These are laws that he believes in and is willing to impose on others. Our rulers must be subject to the same laws that they impose on others... Suppose that there were some underlying rationale better than merely saving his own skin. Does it rise to the level of your analogy? In your scenario, the imminent danger of drowning makes it okay to knock out the guard. Surely if the danger were merely of getting wet and catching cold, there would be no justification for taking the law into one's own hands. What was the big deal that justified Clinton?....