« Cotillion Ball IX -- and all that jazz | Main | Disgusting beyond words »
July 27, 2005
Some thoughts from your cryptoXtianHoZionistFascistChimpyluvrPoseur host
Oops. Forgot to work in the HaliburtonLimbaughHannity thingies.
I'm always fascinated when I get flamed by someone. Now I differentiate between those I may be in disagreement with, and those that feel it is their [insert diety/non-diety of choice] duty to engage in invectives and ad hominems with nary a substantial argument in sight. The latest being a commenter posting from NY state who thinks Christianity (or "poseur" Christianity) is the biggest scourge of the planet. You know the slams against Je...er..Zionists will soon make its appearance.
Oh. And white sluts, too, seem to be an object of obsession with him/her.
So let me briefly run down a few of my actual points that seems to have caused this painful emotional diarrhea for the commenter.
The London shooting incident was one of tragedy, especially sorrowful because I don't see how it could have turned out any differently. As Neil points out in comments here, since the bobbies were plain clothed it was, indeed, possible that the electrician didn't know or ignored their calls to stop. However, it no more follows that these London cops were on a mission to "execute a brown person" any more than the NYPD cops were riding around the streets itching to find a "brown person" to pop a cap in when the Amadou Diallo incident went down. My inner rant is to those that promote the idea that anytime a cop unholsters his/her gun it's only to execute some poor, innocent, misunderstood [popular minority d'jour]. Cops, of course, never shoot bad guys let alone make honest mistakes.
When I engage in discussions, here and in other forums, with others on the Law and morality, they quickly understand the thrust of my thesis - Law is a subset of morality. Each day we make value judgments - is doing this good/bad/better/worse - and our values are part of our personal morality. The Law is society's reflection of basic morality; those items it wishes to codify as a floor for the operation of the society and to accurately reflect its consensus values. The oft seen rant (almost always used in connection when discussing "conservatives") "I don't want anyone to legislate morality!" is particularly silly because that is what about every law does. Laws against murder, rape, and theft are all reflections of the values and morality of the society that institutes them.
The matter then becomes not one of legislating based on morality vs. non-morality, but one of whose morality and how much of it to legislate. Certainly Islamists believe themselves (and only themselves) as moral. I reject their morality as fitting for human beings based on my embraced morality arising from a Western, Judeo-Christian heritage in which sovereignty resides within the individual and a society where voluntary interaction between individuals is to be protected as much as possible.
For example, Jane Fonda is revisiting her Vietnam era politics with a new bus tour to oppose the US military in Iraq. I find her actions reprehensible, indecent and definitely immoral. However, I don't believe it illegal. She has just as much right to make a public fool of herself and garner the enmity of patriotic Americans as the next Leftist cult member.
The open discussion of morality and its impact upon society and individuals is not only worthy but also vital. When the Law fails as a tool of moral good, it ceases to be good law. This is easily observed when law is enacted with worthy goals and motives but fails through unintended consequences. See Prohibition.
Let me add that it is equally silly to argue that 'morality' only exists with a belief in God, as it is to insist one can legislate without morality.
I believe I've been thoughtful, logical and clear when I engage in these kinds of discussions. It leaves me to wonder about the reading comprehension skills of flamers.
Or their real motives.
Be that as it may, most flaming causes me a great deal of amusement. As my grandmother Mildred advised when I was upset that a particular kid in class was saying nasty things
"Consider the source."
Sometimes being "hated" can be a badge of honor.
Posted by Darleen at July 27, 2005 12:21 PM