Not what I said, but yes, always.

It is your inherent right to break any law at any time. But with that
right comes a responsibility. As they say, you have got to be willing
to do the time if you do the crime. It is a kind of contract between
yourself and society. For society's part, we honor that contract by
only enforcing the law that was in place AT THE TIME of the crime. It
is sort of the price of admission.

As for this specific example, we have as a society passed legislation
to protect or shield whistleblowers from persecution and prosecution.

This is because it was decided that, in some cases, the right of the
public to know, especially in cases where secrecy makes that knowledge
difficult, was more important than the rules or laws preventing that
disclosure.

Not that anyone wanting to blab anything gets a free pass, but that
there is a shield law in place for those cases where the public's need
to know outweighs the rights of the secret holders.


On 4/24/06, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > JJ wrote:
> > I would agree, although she shouldn't need to resign. That is the
> > reason that whistleblower laws were passed.
> >
>
> So you agree with breaking the law as long as the reason behind it is
> based in ethics?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:205305
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54

Reply via email to