Replies

Today there are Laws all GOOD citizens must dis-obey. Today there are Natural Laws which are outlaw, which good citizens must do their best to see are still upheld. Just so we can survive through a few more generations.

And what happens when the elite law-makers of a society turn on it, turn against teh natural good order of society and man? Individuals are compelled to act to their own judgment, and some of those judgments will be tragically bad.

These are most difficult times. What was right is now wrong. What was wrong is now right. The Law is become despotic, venal, corrupting.

We do not yet have the recourse that the Founders did, when they set forth the legal bill of grievances known as The Declaration of Independence. They wrote:

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve [the government and regular process of law] which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

We are caught here. Government HAS been long suffered by the People, it is now grown intolerably despotic. How do I measure this? Best by the bastardy rate! Two out of five children born to unmarried mothers. OUR time's despotism is suffered by the broken families, by the young raised without Fathers, by a government sponsored and promoted sexual amorality that demands grade-schoolers be trained in sexual perversions and that we celebrate homosexual "marriage". Adultery is no longer a crime, Sexual disease is rampant in college sophomores.

Those things alone are enough! And yet the government's despotism hasn't stopped there. Contract law is now nullified -- the car company and bank bonds are contracts subject no only to the day-to-day goodwill of the Regent -- usurper Obama. Property is taken by whimsy of government (Kelo v New London). People who live on top of great bodies of ground water, or lakes and rivers are prevented by niggardly regulation from having decent bathroom showers.

Yet the Founders were wise -- not only was it needed to have insufferable despostism long suffered (the state we are now in), but also we must have the ability to initiate and establish alternative government. They had an alternative -- the local and colony governments were the alternative. We, in our time do not.

We are in a much tougher spot.

What happens? What we are seeing. Breakdown in the actual law and order.

You miss the bigger point. The Rule of Law has been seriously harmed by Obama's dictatorial and arbitrary rule, and with the currents of social deconstruction by despotism and perversion which have been entered into law and regulation. Thus it is no longer a matter of personal choice to obey "The Law" just because it is the law. Each is left to his own judgment. The law -- case law, statute law, regulation -- is no longer a guide. We are discussing the appropriateness of committing murder. I stated that we should abide by the rule of law, so I opened up that can of worms. I still don't think bringing Obama into this is reasoned. He has not made some new recent law that impacts abortion. The abortion laws on our books were there long before him. I don't see the validity of bringing him into this any more than bringing George Bush into it. Taking the law into our own hands does not make things better. It makes things exponentially worse. The courts and our government may not be perfect, but they are preferable to anarchy.

Today there are Laws all GOOD citizens must dis-obey. Today there are Natural Laws which are outlaw, which good citizens must do their best to see are still upheld. Just so we can survive through a few more generations. Look, anarchy is not the answer. We live in a stable state of being for the most part. What you are advocating is a departure from that. We would have our little enclaves that would take justice into their own hands. Okay then what? The the left forms little enclaves where they take justice into their own hands. This creates a civil war setting like what took place in Lebanon, Kosovo, you name it. You don't quite get that do you?

And what happens when the elite law-makers of a society turn on it, turn against teh natural good order of society and man? Individuals are compelled to act to their own judgment, and some of those judgments will be tragically bad. I agree. Those judgments would be tragically bad. That's why the threshold for the type of activity you describe is so much higher than you seem to think it is.

These are most difficult times. What was right is now wrong. What was wrong is now right. The Law is become despotic, venal, corrupting. We can certainly find evidences of that, but it's not as bad as you paint it to be. Right now we have some things we definitely disagree with. In the model you seems to support above, we would have a situation flipped upside down. Instead of having some things we disagree with now, we would only have some things we agreed with then. Imagine open season on your local streets, as one faction wared on another. That's what the end result would be. It wouldn't be a new better government. It would be almost the total lack of government, federal and local. The local police couldn't cope with the open season you seem to think is warranted.

We do not yet have the recourse that the Founders did, when they set forth the legal bill of grievances known as The Declaration of Independence. They wrote:

    When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve [the government and regular process of law] which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

    Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Do you have any concept of how low you have set the bar in order to justify the murder of an abortion doctor? To justify the murder, you have called to question the very existence of our nation. Now we're to be looking to declare independence and start a new union, separate nations. I personally think you have lost contact with reality to justify what you want to.

Look, Obama is a very bad choice to be Pres__ent. There's no doubt about it. And yes, it does call to question the legal underpinnings of our nation. What has that got to do with the murder of an abortion doctor. Focus bud.

We are caught here. Government HAS been long suffered by the People, it is now grown intolerably despotic. How do I measure this? Best by the bastardy rate! Two out of five children born to unmarried mothers. OUR time's despotism is suffered by the broken families, by the young raised without Fathers, by a government sponsored and promoted sexual amorality that demands grade-schoolers be trained in sexual perversions and that we celebrate homosexual "marriage". Adultery is no longer a crime, Sexual disease is rampant in college sophomores. It was the enactment of new laws and policies that brought this about. And it's the enactment of new laws and policies that will put an end to it. You don't destroy the framework of governance we have, to fix it. Anarchy is still anarchy. NO!

Those things alone are enough! And yet the government's despotism hasn't stopped there. Contract law is now nullified -- the car company and bank bonds are contracts subject no only to the day-to-day goodwill of the Regent -- usurper Obama. Property is taken by whimsy of government (Kelo v New London). People who live on top of great bodies of ground water, or lakes and rivers are prevented by niggardly regulation from having decent bathroom showers. These may all be good topics for other discussion, but I disagree that they are intertwined with this matter to the degree you seem to think they are.

Yet the Founders were wise -- not only was it needed to have insufferable despostism long suffered (the state we are now in), but also we must have the ability to initiate and establish alternative government. They had an alternative -- the local and colony governments were the alternative. We, in our time do not. Once again, we are talking about the murder of an abortion doctor. We are not talking about the irrevocable movement to overthrow this government and start all over. Good grief man. Are you aware of the ramifications of your post here? I shudder to think of people reading this diatribe. We were talking about the appropraiteness of murder, and now it's escalated to the need to overthrow the government. That's just moon-bat crazy.

We are in a much tougher spot. Perhaps we'll discuss your theories some day, but I'm not going to discuss this expansive ballooning of logic, on this thread. I came here to discuss the merits of murder to get our way.

What happens? What we are seeing. Breakdown in the actual law and order. I would urge you to read this sentence twenty times, then go back over this post of yours and see how you are playing into the very thing you seem to be heralding here.

If there is a breakdown of law as evidenced by this murder, then who is advocating a break down of law, if they think what this guy did was right on.

I think he was a wing nut. He was wrong. He deserves to be executed for what he did. This is not the way to go about making our nation better. Your train of thought here makes that painfully obvious.