From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Mon Sep 01 2003 - 21:01:06 MDT
On Sunday 31 August 2003 21:45, Kevin Freels wrote:
> I see absolutely no problem with it.
> Sure it's nice to say "we respect the decisions of those even though we may
> not agree with them", but isn't it time that we didn't? We have the gold,
> let's make the rules. Let us declare boldly that killing is bad unless you
> are killing a killer and be done with it.
Basically you are saying that might makes right.
> Many will argue with the premise of "two wrongs don't make a right" but
> they are working with the assumption that killing a killer is wrong in the
> first place.
Not really relevant.
> I'm not saying we should just bust into any country we decide is "bad", but
> we should politely ask any ruler that practices acts of torture and murder
> on his own people to step down. Then if they don;t, go get them.
>
Ah. We should ask them to give up power completely and if the don't then they
"asked for it" heh?
> What right have we? Every right in the world. We are protecting people to
> provide their children with a greater genetic diversity. What other higher
> purpose could there be?
There are all manner of supposedly "higher purposes" in the world. Which
would you like enforced on you and yours? Never mind, you don't have a
choice. You will be forced to serve whatever "higher purpose" appeals to
whatever group has the most physical power. Have a nice day.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Sep 01 2003 - 21:09:46 MDT