Come on. You don't need to resort to straw man arguments like the statements about Islamic women to make a point. You sound smart enough to forgo that.
The fact is, since Cain murdered Abel, human beings have killed and hurt each other. The fact that Cain is notorious is due to the fact that the population of human civilization was very low, being first means something.
The current human population is 6.5 billion people. The current population of the USA is 296 million people. So yeah, with those numbers, there was probably a Cain murdering an Abel while I typed. It is an ongoing problem with mankind, it has been with us since day one. And yeah, we should talk about it. I presume you have ideas, and aren't just going to gripe about it.
What happened on 9/11 was that 19 Cains killed 3000 Abels, and it wasn't a crime of passion. It was a cold, calculated premeditated rip in the fabric of society.
I really want to know: Do you see no difference between an isolated incident of one person killing another person for any reason, and one group deciding to perform that same act on a large scale against a group of innocents for ideological reasons?
With respect to voting, you seem to forget that some people disagree with you. There are people who may not think the IRS should be abolished. There are some who think the borders should be open. There are some who think the war on drugs is a good thing. I may happen to agree on all points with you, but you know what? Not everyone does, and certainly not on every issue. I happen to think we should be pumping more money into our military, and there are a lot of others who think we shouldn't even have a military. If they get their way on one subject or another, I am going to do what I can to get it changed, if it is important to me. I presume these issues you outlined are important to you. What have you done about them?
No disrespect intended, but people can make a difference. If you get off your ass and get involved, you can make a difference. You don't think so, and your cynicism on that subject is clear. If your last paragraph is all you have to offer, then you are part of the problem, not the solution. Please don't take this personally, but cynicism is not what made our country great.
Hi, thank you for your thoughtful responses. I do understand where you are coming from.
To answer this question ... no. I don't see any difference between 35,000 "isolated" incidents, or one 4,000 person incident. In fact, I would prefer the latter rather than he former. If you win the lottery you can take 20 yearly payments, or a lump sum. Either way, you still won the lottery, and the amount of money is the same (okay, more if you take the monthly payments but you get the point).
We shouldn't let the drama of a single incident overshadow the real threat, which unfortunately ... is us. And much of that "us" is not protecting our borders, which BTW would have prevented 9/11 altogether, along with hundreds of thousands of other innocent muders over the decades. When you leave the henhouse door open for the fox, who's fault is it when the chickens get eaten?
And yeah, we should talk about it. I presume you have ideas, and aren't just going to gripe about it.
Oh yes. Not only the enforced right, but possibly the requirement of every able-bodied American to train to use and own a firearm. And obsessively strict immigration laws.
The problem lies in the fact that the only candidates who would consider such things are considered "throw away votes", and so we get the status-quo year after year from the supposedly-patriotic masses. Unfortunately, I can't do it alone. I need some people who can think beyond a party line to join me, which there doesn't seem to be a surplus of.
With respect to voting, you seem to forget that some people disagree with you. There are people who may not think the IRS should be abolished. There are some who think the borders should be open. There are some who think the war on drugs is a good thing. I may happen to agree on all points with you, but you know what? Not everyone does, and certainly not on every issue.
Of course. But for those who DO sagree with me ... who sould they have voted for? What candidate represented those views? Those who don't agree with me were presented with two candidates. And not by coincidence the only candidates who were allowed in any televised debate.
I'm all for people choosing their concious, as long as they have a viable choice on the ballot and don't need to endlessly pull the lever for "the lessor of two evils". And honestly, doesn't that seem to be the case? How many GWB voters do you know of that support amnesty? Weren't the basically just more scared of Kerry?
What have you done about them?
Thrown my vote away.
No disrespect intended, but people can make a difference.
Sure, people who can be legislators can make tons of difference. No arguement here.
If you get off your ass and get involved, you can make a difference.
Not really. We are at a point now (especialy since 9/11) where any kind of independent thinking is seens as "a threat" and pretty much relagates anything outside of a narrow spectrum of thinking to the "wingut" category. No?
You don't think so, and your cynicism on that subject is clear. If your last paragraph is all you have to offer, then you are part of the problem, not the solution. Please don't take this personally, but cynicism is not what made our country great.
You may be suprised, but I agree. What made our country great were things like the Boston Tea Party and other events when people actually had balls.
Now we have a huge disarmed public, armed government, Monday Night Football and cold beer.
Outside of a few notable exceptions, what made our country great is gone. We are now the England we fled, and so it is ....