Uncool, you concluded with:
"I hope that is clear enuff..."
Far from it. About the only thing that was clear to me was when
you said this:
"I do not trust anouther person to not violate my rights any more
than I feel they should trust me not to violate thier rights"
That statement is not only severely elitist and prejudicial, but
also paranoid and threatening. If you rationally explained your
mistrust of everyone (including yourself), I could not see it.
And if you tried to finally explain your earlier accusation, that
unlimited libertarianism promotes aggression, I could not find
it. But if you are trying to use your paranoid and prejudicial
reasoning to defend your own promotion of aggression, it fails
miserably. Again, I can only speculate as to the real meaning of
your writings, the readability of which seems to be deteriorating
instead of improving - I'm sure to the frustration of more than
just me.
-Mark
************
{American jurors have complete Constitutional authority to vote
"not guilty" based on nothing more than a disagreement with the
case, no matter the evidence - despite the judge's instructions.
There is absolutely no obligation to vote "guilty" to arrive at a
unanimous verdict. Get on a jury, stand your ground, and fulfill
its other main purpose: to counteract abusive government and
unjust lawsuits.
See www.fija.org
[Please adopt this as your own signature.] }
_____
You changed the question Terry. However, you did not change your
meaning. This all depends on your idea of Justice, in my view as
everything is relative. My point of view is that idealy nothing
justifies my violating anouther person, howver, the basis for my
thinking is that I am no less a person than that person, and what
would justify them violating me. My point of view is that in the
real of reality, I do not trust anouther person to not violate my
rights any more than I feel they should trust me not to violate
thier rights Terry. There then becomes a dilema, if individuals
do
violate rights, and this gives them power, me as that individual
person, and that other individual person who I have no justified
cause to violate, are weaker, and this already established
violater
of persons now has power over us individualy, so much so that we
can
not prevent the violation of our rights. Now, do we resist in a
manner we know to be futile Terry, or to we forge a union with
the
goal of the strength we need to resist this violation.
He who calls for reform, for expediency as your little blurb put
it,
is not in every case seeking to violate that first person, but
rather seeking an effective way to resist, a way that he can see
will work, as he believes for many seeing is believing, and he
knows
if he can see it, others can see it, and if they SEE IT Terry,
maybee he believes that they will belive, and he just wants them
to
believe. Maybee his compromise for expediency is because he has a
little baby boy, that he hopes will see and believe. Maybee he
talked of writting a letter to tell the president what he feels
is
wrong about the course on wich the country was about to head, and
stay if only he thought there was a chance it would be read, to
see
a worried look in his mothers eye from across the table and here
her
say "Don't go doing anything that will get you in trouble." and
know
that there was something so deeply wrong in his world that he
beleived things had to change, that they had to be different, so
that his son could live in a world with out fear from the very
thing
thats intended purpose should be to leave him with out fear.
I hope that is clear enuff to you Terry, to tell you why I do not
think a move, if not in any way decreasing Libertey, done for the
sake of expedioency, is a move for Liberty, not against Liberty,
and
why your little blurb offends me so very deeply.
_____
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
