On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 04:07:48PM -0800, Nick Arnett wrote: > Perhaps the subject says it all; in case is doesn't... With almost > any war or threat of war, some will brand anti-war protestors as > traitors, etc. Or perhaps as jackasses. Over the last few days, I've > found myself seriously wondering what it means when there are so many > such complaints against anti-war protestors being aired today. Do the > critics of anti-war protestors really want to live in a country where > there is not a strong voice for peace?
I'm all for peace activists, as long as they have given a lot of thought to their position, the consequences, other alternatives, and the overall costs and state their position clearly. This is extraordinarily rare, in my experience, however. > Isn't going to war such an sigificant action that it deserves > criticism as much as any other? A nation that enters war with little > or no protest would be a very frightening thing, I think. And does > that ever really happen unless those who would advocate for peace are > afraid to speak up? Maybe if they were more...not afraid but...nervous, about speaking up, they would give a more coherent and well-thought out message when they finally do speak up? Most of them look foolish to me, and not because they advocate peace, but rather because of how poorly they argue for it. > But poised on the brink of war, it comes home even more, as I see and > hear what seems to be a large group of people who have no respect for > peace advocacy. Respect should be earned, don't you think? -- "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreuter.net/ _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
