Parole..

[FLOTSOM]

ummm, no.  Rape and murder are "wrong" because they violate another individual's rights, not because a law says they're wrong.  Take away the laws and rape and murder are still wrong.

so, when you drive 65 in a 55 your intentions are evil?  diaf evil-doer!
ORLY?  St. Augustine said "An unjust law is no law at all" and that sentiment was echoed by the founding fathers, MLK,  and countless others.  Nazi Germany had lots of laws, would you have felt morally bound to follow 'em all?  If you were living in post-civil-war America, would you have felt morally bound to turn in any slaves you discovered to be trying to escape their "owners" via the underground railroad?  Face it, man, sometimes the law is just plain wrong and a moral person has an OBLIGATION to resist them.  By your arguement we'd still be a British colony, no?

but we only have RIGHTS because they were endowed by law. we are born with them only because the law says we are. what we percive as a right others do not. it is all based upon moral interpretation by the society at large.

laws, rights, entitlement ect only exist because someone at some point decided to enforce their beliefs and veiws upon others. you were not born with a book telling you what your rights were, they were gifted to you by the struggles of those that came before. not all of these struggles were violent, look to the example of Martin Luther King, he changed the entire nation, look at Ghaundi he changed the peception of the world. but they did so by obidience to the laws while protesting without violence.

in some societies a woman who is raped can be sent to prison for that rape, is this right? not to me, but to those who created the laws in that place it is. should i enforce my belief of justice upon them? what about their rights to govern themselves?

if i was alive durring the revolution i would have put the noose around the neck of washington myself. not because i believe we should remain an english colony, but because i believe you remain loyal to your country of birth. we were a british colony and subject to the crown, the crown had a RIGHT by the laws to enjoy the benifits of our loyalty. a loyalty which we broke intentionally and had they been caught the founding fathers would have paid the consequences for their actions. (on a side note, George Washington is one of my heroes and in my opinion one of the greatest men to ever serve as president. so please do not side track this conversation. my point in the statement is he was a criminal in the revolution, not what the accomplishments of the man were or his stature as a human being of great integrity)

you are correct, sometimes the law is wrong. but fortunately we live in a society that allows us to change those laws. this is not nazi germany where you did or you died. go out and vote for the candidate that is in line with your points of veiw, post information supporting your arguments for change, fight (non-violently) for what you believe in.

but the job of every moral citizen who opposes a rule or law is to work to change it in a manner that is legal and peaceful. not to break it because they dont like it. in my opinion it is an unjust law that i cant smash in the face a person talking trash to me. does that make my opinion the proper one for the safety of society? should the law be that if you dont like the law you need not bother to obey it?


FLOTSOM

[CAP1]

no you do not sound like an arse, it is the same opinion of society at large, which is why i went to prison for it.

my statement was in reffence to my direct actions and participation guilt of a crime. i had no action in the in the event. i did not commit or take any direct part in the crime, i was actually half a block away talking to someone else entirely when it occurred. but i was a part of the group that did commit it, and i had a very good reason to believe that it would happen if nothing was done to prevent it. in my mind at the time (and to be honest even today) the person was gonna get what they deserved. so i accepted my responsibility in the event, omission of an act of prevention is as culpable an act as the performance of a direct action.

i think what i was trying do get a cross in my comment is that there are varying levels of what guilt or innocent is. that allot of those who cry innocence because they had no direct action in a particular event, are in reality as guilty those committing the act personally. which is why i said factually innocent(taking no part of) technically guilty(failing to prevent). i had no action in the event, but.......

so i agree with you sir, i would have convicted me too.

this is the argument of the age, i disagree with your creation theory. is it because of the laws that rape or burglary are wrong? what about murder, we just decriminalize it and all will be OK? evil in tention is an intentional violation of law, that is what it means. so when you knowingly commit any act in violation of any law your action are intentionally against the greater good. what is law must be supported until it is legally changed. if not then the few who are willing to break the law will rule the land and the rest will suffer for it. they voted it illegal, there for until it is changed by vote it shall remain illegal whether or not you and i agree with them that it should be.

now morally as in regards to lesser drugs i agree with you, legalize it and leave the people alone.

i agree completely with your statement about getting a person of good behavior out of jail and off the tax paying meal ticket.

technically a crime is anything that is in contradiction to the greater good. All laws are regulatory in their nature. we live in a society that votes its laws into power, the greater good carries the vote by numbers. i do not agree with all of the laws, but that changes nothing. society would fall apart and end in chaos if we allowed people to pick and chose what laws they will abide by. we live in a society, a collective group of people, as an individual we must live up to that societies standards or be willing to accept the consequences of our actions.

old proverb, "don't do the crime if you cant do the time". sounds lame but it is true. if you don't want to face the possible consequences of your actions then don't commit them.

i morally agree with you, but i understand that the law is the law. if you don't like it as it is work on changing it not just breaking it.

very well put sir!!!!!!

but i believe the they are laws that try to protect by attempting to control.

Wonderful conversation guys

i <SALUTE> all of your opinions

FLOTSOM

hey......

i should've added, that it was very very stand up of you to take that term the way you did too. 

[FLOTSOM]

Thank you <S>

but in reality i have always believed that it would have been far more stand up of me to have prevented the act from happening at all. my friends counted on my rational to balance their impulsiveness, in that instance i let them down. i think that is a fundamental part of why i felt i deserved what i got.

<SALUTE>

FLOTSOM

[CAP1]

Thank you <S>

but in reality i have always believed that it would have been far more stand up of me to have prevented the act from happening at all. my friends counted on my rational to balance their impulsiveness, in that instance i let them down. i think that is a fundamental part of why i felt i deserved what i got.

<SALUTE>

FLOTSOM

yes, you did......but you realized your mistake. i'd also be willing to bet, it's a mistake you've never repeated. i'd think you probably tried to fix that mistake too.

<<S>>

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<tries to look at good side of things, even though i'm somewhat paranoid.

[FLOTSOM]

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<tries to look at good side of things, even though i'm somewhat paranoid.

Just because your paranoid doesnt mean they arnt following you!!!!!


<S>