regard@ttidcc.UUCP (Adrienne Regard) (04/12/85)
>From Ken Arndt: >The above dialog is VERY interesting. The reposter directly above believes >we must all obey the LAW even if we hold to other moral views. The LAW is >the final court of appeal - not conscience!! >Never mind that this kind of thinking stands against yonks of moral >philosophy throughout the history of mankind, or that it displays a child- >like 'faith' in the rightness of the LAW and complete ignorance of how it >is formulated or what it is based on. >According to him, all a dictator has to do is pass a LAW that the LAW can >no longer be changed or resisted and hey presto! Captive nation. Well, you're 1/3 right. I do believe we should live by the laws. The foundation of law, developed by the majority, is the basis of the country. After that, you take your usual left turn. I'm all for people expressing their moral point of view, and all for them working through legal means to make their point of view become the law. If the majority of the people in the US made bombing of abortion clinics legal, then I probably wouldn't bomb one myself, but I certainly wouldn't feel righteous about telling you not to. That is where I differ from all those anti-abortionists who have decided what's best for me. (read the last two sentences carefully, sub- stituting your favorite digusting practice). Actually, I have disgustingly little faith in the laws, or the methods used to develop them. Lawyers are some of my least favorite people, and I have to remind myself when I deal with them that there's a screw loose somewhere. As you _could_ have pointed out, it is imperfect humans who make the laws, and some (lawyers) are more imperfect than most. But what is the choice? Conscience? I use my conscience to guide my personal affairs -- but I don't think _my_ conscience will do _you_ much good. And, of course, laws change all the time, or the whole debate on abortion would be specious, wouldn't it? Seems to me it is the bombers who think laws can't be changed, so they opt for terrorist acts. My greatest abhorance to the bombing of clinics has zip to do with either side of the abortion debate. It has to do with terrorism in my back yard. If we turn a blind eye to bombing of clinics, what comes next? Factories when workers are on strike, is that o.k., too? How about hospitals that keep an unpopular political figure alive, how about it? Hell, let's do away with the legislature building and that's that, eh? Yeh, yeh, Ken, I know you're having a lot of fun with this. So'm I, but let's get back to the land of the living, o.k.? Either that or mail me so we can take this whole circus off-line. Adrienne Regard
ark@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig) (04/15/85)
Adrienne Regard says: > I do believe we should live by the laws. The > foundation of law, developed by the majority, is the basis of the country. Later in the same article, she says: > Actually, I have disgustingly little faith in the laws, or the methods used > to develop them. Well, which is it? You can't have both.