Becasue we have laws or we have anarchy. Then you might not like who the other guy decides needs killing.
The only beings that should get to decide “who gets killed” are God, and the intended victim of a would-be heinous criminal (murderer, rapist, and such). This is why guns are so handy, just like fire extingushers-!
Hugin & GoldStandard : I would normally agree with you, however, I would submit that we are no longer a nation that follows the ‘Rule of Law’. If we followed the rule of law Barack Obama would have been impeached over his obvious unconstitutional acts associated with the Bail out and bankruptcies of Chrysler and GM. Barney Frank & Chris Dodd would be facing trial for their blatant influence peddling and corruption associated with the collapse of Fanny & Freddie and the housing market. And Dr George Tiller would be in prison for performing illegal abortions as he was accused of just a few short months ago.
No. We live in a country almost wholly controlled by a political elite that cares little about what their constituents feel because almost none of them are ever not reelected. Gerrymandering and political dealing have driven us so far from a recognizable civil society that there is little hope that we will long survive as a free people.
I am not clear on why dueling was eliminated. Anyone have an idea?
Laws that do not serve justice are not lawful — as Alamo-Girl so beautifully illustrates here. She wrote: "In the case at hand, the courts, media and pro-abortion side are careful to call the unborn child, even a viable child, a fetus — and the killing, a medical procedure to terminate a pregnancy. But dehumanizing the unborn does not make it so, nor does using a substitute phrase making killing any less than what it is."
You can't make an unjustice just by "reinventing the language" and waving the magic wand of specious legal arguments.
Which is just to say that laws must be measured against the standard of justice in order to be truly lawful. So it seems to me that what we have here is not an argument between law and anarchy, but about whether unjust laws will stand in America.
And it is precisely because we don't want MEN deciding what "other guys need killing" that we have recourse to divine law, which is the foundation of American justice. Murder, as defined in the Bible, is the willful taking of innocent life. Roeder's act was certainly willful. But was Tiller an "innocent life?"
Just askin' — a conundrum for your reflection.
Yes indeed we will.
But, if the laws are "unjust", should the masses continue to abide them?
Unjust laws rendered by unjust men foster anarchy!
Murder is Murder. The penalty for Murder is Death. It says so in the Ten Commandments too.