Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Cadaver

Did Kerry Cheat?

Recommended Posts

The problem there is that terrorist snipers can easily kill Space Marines and track their movements.

 

...that is, until the SMs put on their helmets and stop using the turn signals on the landraiders...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As for expectation of privacy at a public library - my post wasn't just: "Aww, someone saw what book I checked out."

 

My post was: "I'm sorry - even tho' we happily took your money and scheduled you for the flight at Gate 13D, the government will not allow us to let you fly...and you now have to go into a small room and answer many questions because you checked out a book."

 

Certainly you don't think that checking out one book is going to put you on a no fly list. Checking out a flagged book may give way to further scrutinizing of other aspects of your life, for certain, but it's not going to land you in a dark room with a bright light in your eyes. Of course if you have evidence of just this sort of thing happening, do share. :)

 

I understand that if pieces of what I say are taken out of context they may seem unimportant or even whiny, but I encourage you to take the whole of my point and disagree - or agree - with it.  And then say why. I won't learn anything from you otherwise.

 

The context you were using, was that you were redirecting a statement from another user not wanting to support an administration that believes in a larger government that is more involved in the lives of the people (that person meaning Democrat). You used the examples of Pro Choice, which the current administration is against (and thereby implementing itself in a private decision), and the Patriot Act, which gives the government rights to make overt actions without the standard course of law (and thereby giving itself greater access into the lives of people).

 

As you can see, I'm fully aware of the context in which your statements were used.

My statement was that they were oversimplified in the making of your point. Here's why.

 

It is the duty of the government to enforce its laws, and protect its constituency.

One of the laws is that against murder; that is to say, the willful killing of another human being. The core difference between "pro-choice" and "pro-life" is the belief as to what makes something a human life. Pro-Life states that it is a human life from the time of conception, pro-choice states that it is not life until it can sustain itself outside the womb. To a pro-life administration, the unborn child is in as much of a position for its life to be protected, as a child that is outside the womb. Therefore, to insinuate that a pro-life administration which wants pro-life legislation is trying to interfere with your personal choice is an oversimplification of their intentions and goals.

 

By the same token, to say that the intention of the Patriot Act is to interfere with the personal lives of people is also an oversimplification. I'll use a quote from another user:

 

One of the inherent difficulties with freedom is that people are free... Free to break the law, free to infiltrate the country for nefarious reasons...You can't have a free and open society without risk.

 

This is totally incorrect. The idea of a "freedom" is that you are able and allowed to do something without fear of punishment or reprisal. You are not free to commit a crime; if you do so, you do so at the risk of punishment. You are not free to infiltrate the country for nefarious reasons; you do so at the risk of capture and punishment. Simply because you are "able" to do something, does not mean that you are “free” to do it.

 

You can't have ANY sort of society without risk or danger. It is, however, the duty of the government to work towards protecting its constituency, and minimizing the danger to it. The Patriot act put in place certain abilities for the government to work towards this goal. Its purpose isn’t to limit the freedoms of Americans, but to set up an additional line of defense against internal attackers.

 

 

So, in response to your insinuation that the current administration is trying to make itself a greater force in the lives of the American people, based on the examples you provided, I disagree, from the position that both of those things are done, from their point of view, to defend the human lives, and the lives of Americans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×