1. Regarding the Czechs — the Government surrendered — the people never did. And the Geneva Convention only applies when it works to our enemies advantage...
2. The difference between the Founders and Brown was that the Founders acted based on shared principles, after ore than a decade of appeals for redress, and they did so as representatives of their respective States. John Brown was a coward and vigilante who acted unilaterally and illegally.
3. That justice and legality are not synonymous is a principle we agree on. That the murder of an unborn child is the same as the murder of a 2 yr old child I generally agree on (there may be a caveat or 2, but generally agreed). But where we draw the line may be different. That Tiller is dead is not something I will weep over. But the question is, what is the net effect of that “justice” the killer doled out? I’ll tell you, the murder of MORE unborn babies, under the protection of Federal law enforcement, AND the persecution of those who would work to see abortions end! It was both illegal AND unjust to murder Tiller, if for no other reason than because the net effect will be that more babies die, and more liberties are lost — and civil conflict inevitably comes closer.
4. The Left never has to pay a price because they have no morals, and make no pretense to having morals (unless they see political benefit in it). There is therefore no criteria by which they are held accountable. The Press won’t hold them accountable, their comrades in the Washington political elite (Dem or Repub) won’t hold them accountable, their friends in the courts won’t hold them accountable. ONLY the people at election time MAY hold them accountable — and lately, that’s not been true. Furthermore, by the time the census is thru, ACORN is fully funded and in place, and the gerrymandering of new congressional districts in finished, not even a MAJORITY of the voters will be able to beat the deck they’ve stacked.
4. The Left never has to pay a price because they have no morals, and make no pretense to having morals (unless they see political benefit in it). There is therefore no criteria by which they are held accountable. The Press won’t hold them accountable, their comrades in the Washington political elite (Dem or Repub) won’t hold them accountable, their friends in the courts won’t hold them accountable. ONLY the people at election time MAY hold them accountable — and lately, that’s not been true. Furthermore, by the time the census is thru, ACORN is fully funded and in place, and the gerrymandering of new congressional districts in finished, not even a MAJORITY of the voters will be able to beat the deck they’ve stacked.
* * * *
good work, though I disagree with your number 3, in that Tiller got his just desserts.
We are speaking about matters of legality. The government surrendering makes the killing of Heidrich murder. But your point that the people ultimately must obey their own sense of justice apart from the government is precisely my point.
2. The difference between the Founders and Brown was that the Founders acted based on shared principles, after ore than a decade of appeals for redress, and they did so as representatives of their respective States. John Brown was a coward and vigilante who acted unilaterally and illegally.
Which is an excellent point. The Founders felt bound to present the Declaration of Independence before George III, and the Czechs established a government in exile. That said, the Founders excused a great deal of violence against the British, which occurred prior to the Declaration based on the premise that the people were acting out on issues of natural rights. The abolitionists had a long history and certainly represented a lot of people. What was John Brown's goal at Harper's Ferry? To arm a slave revolt. I doubt that the slaves working the fields of the South condemned his actions as too fanatical. And I doubt that any of us that had families ripped from us and our persons placed under another's total control would consider those actions too fanatical. So its really a matter of perspective.
But where we draw the line may be different. That Tiller is dead is not something I will weep over. But the question is, what is the net effect of that “justice” the killer doled out? I’ll tell you, the murder of MORE unborn babies, under the protection of Federal law enforcement, AND the persecution of those who would work to see abortions end! It was both illegal AND unjust to murder Tiller, if for no other reason than because the net effect will be that more babies die, and more liberties are lost — and civil conflict inevitably comes closer.
Actually, we are not in disagreement on that, except that I would caveat that it is possible for an action to be both just in the micro and counterproductive in the macro. That is actually the crux of my point. Interestingly it is thousands of Czechs were slaughtered in retaliation for the death of Heidrich, so the same question could be asked concerning that.