Mr. 5020 said:I think it's the difference of 6,000,000 to 1.
You said moral difference. Oops.Imrahil said:So it's morally acceptable to starve a woman to death if she's handicapped?
Mr. 5020 said:You said moral difference. Oops.
Except that he came across as such a loser that hardly anyone followed him...Jefferson said:julie21:
The following quote from Mr. McBurney should answer your question:
That's the tactic he wanted to use. With 300 people nonviolently and simultaneously approaching every entrance at least several people would have been able to slip by security.
Mr. 5020 said:I think it's the difference of 6,000,000 to 1.
Here? Two.SOTK said:How many death threats have you received?
Ok, so.... what's the moral difference? Both are evil and result in the death of an innocent human being.julie21 said:Imrahil...it's not just as Mr 5020 pointed out, but the fact that one was done under the Dictatorship of a madman, compared to this case having been dealt with through the legal channels according to your 'Land of the Free' Constitution.
The actions / directives inflicted on millions via one syphyllis ridden, power hungry, madman cannot be held up as a mirror to the carrying out of a legal decree set down and voted upon in a Democratically based society!
You mean the politicians that we voted for? We did vote for her to die, in a "republic"-an way.Imrahil said:P.S. This is irrelevant but no one voted for her to die. Evil judges decreed it and weak politicians wouldn't stop it.
True. Another sign that our political system is fundamentally flawed.Mr. 5020 said:You mean the politicians that we voted for? We did vote for her to die, in a "republic"-an way.
Did I ever say there was a MORAL difference? The difference is LEGALITY...one being done under a dictatorship and one under the provisions of the Constitution of the United States..yes?Imrahil said:Ok, so.... what's the moral difference? Both are evil and result in the death of an innocent human being.
So if the two actions are equally evil, why did you get upset when they were compared?julie21 said:Did I ever say there was a MORAL difference? The difference is LEGALITY...one being done under a dictatorship and one under the provisions of the Constitution of the United States..yes?
Morally it is wrong to take a life...and those who do will be judged accordingly.
I believe that God will bring His ultimate jugement down on those who allowed this to happen to Terri.
The point of my original post is that I felt this McBurney guys action was merely symbolic...and I still hold to this opinion.
julie21 said:Rimi,
I can only go on what Jefferson reports from the show, as I do not have access to it from here for some reason...Looks as though from the mouth of McBurney himself that it wasn't just symbolic. [That is who you were referring to , wasnt it?]
Imrahil...this is why. The Nazi police were acting out of democratically condoned action...they were onder the control of a madman, Hitler!Jefferson: 3. Should German citizens have had "nothing but praise" for the Nazi police who guarded the concentration camps?
Jefferson said:Terry's brother was wrong for those comments.
1. It is immoral not to flout immoral laws.
2. Getting arrested may not solve the problem but at least history will record that someone did not just stand idly by worshipping the false god of Public Acceptance. It's publicly acceptable to oppose government policy by praying. But it's not publicly acceptable to oppose government policy by getting arrested. At least McBurney does not worship the false god of Public Acceptance.
3. Should German citizens have had "nothing but praise" for the Nazi police who guarded the concentration camps?
julie21 said:Imrahil...this is why. The Nazi police were acting out of democratically condoned action...they were onder the control of a madman, Hitler!
The police outside the Hospital in Terri's case, were patrolling under a lawful, democratically legislated directive...HUGE DIFFERENCE!
julie21 said:Rimi..."I went down there and I told my daughter, "I will try to bring her water." And I told all the people down there that I am going to try to bring her water. And that's what I tried to do. "
These were the 'Doug-ster's own words immediately preceding the line re 'symbolism'...his statement shows that his intent portrayed to his daughter and the others there, was not 'symbolic'.
I would be interested in the results of a poll done on his perceived intentions, taken from all over the American population, as opposed to McBurney's mate Bob E's followers.
A - FRICKIN' - MEN, SISTER!julie21 said:I would be interested in the results of a poll done on his perceived intentions, taken from all over the American population, as opposed to McBurney's mate Bob E's followers.
But do you think McBurney's actions were immoral?julie21 said:The point of my original post is that I felt this McBurney guys action was merely symbolic...and I still hold to this opinion.
Imrahil said:So if it's democratic, the police are ok in killing an innocent woman? By that logic, Hitler was justified! He was popularly elected you know.