>I agree that the right to protest is a basic right. Blocking access, however,
>is not just protesting, it is preventing someone else's basic right. So, if
>their protest prevented others from gaining access, then it was wrong. You
>may not stop people from entering abortion clinics because you think abortion
>is wrong. You may not block someone's lawful access to a building because you
>disagree with either parties policies.
>
>It is not real complicated. Unless one is trying to rationalize ones actions.
>
>Andy
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jerry Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, October 08, 2004 1:35 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: RE: Bush, Kerry and non-admittance
>
>
> I think the right of people to peacefully protest is a very important
>American right.
>
> It seems like these people blocking access to the RNC ticketing office were
>well within their rights to protest in such a way.
>
> The fact that they were protesting access to their President may even make
>it protected political speech.
>
> So I think the means are perfectly valid, regardless of the ends.
>
> (Violence, threats, etc are not valid means, though.)
>
> Jerry Johnson
>
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/08/04 02:22PM >>>
> Wow. So ends justifies the means?
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
