--- Dan Minette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jan Coffey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 3:07 PM
> Subject: Re: Archbishop of Canterbury defends Terrorism
>
>
>
> >
> > So can one really have a good means to a bad end? I personaly do not
> believe
> > this is possible.
>
> Certainly. How about the right of political speech for those who advocate
> actions that would be harmful to the country? I'm opposed to neo-Nazis,
> but I believe that they have a right to advocate changes to the government
> that I deem very harmful.
Your twisting it. Your looking at the action from a perspective which is not
focused on the action it'self but on why the action is not illegal.
While freedom of speach is good, advocating neo-nazism is bad. So the action
it'self is bad. Therefore it is a bad means to a bad end.
=====
_________________________________________________
Jan William Coffey
_________________________________________________
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
