$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('eric_b', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ElijahJones', '
')
(Responding to 'NEOPO')
Maybe he saw someone he thought would be an easy convert to the ridiculous and slanderous theories about the government that you seem to relish so highly. As for being a fundy, I am certainly not that,
(...)
PeakOil is You
Bloggers Who Criticize Government May Face Prison
Re: Bloggers Who Criticize Government May Face Prison
by JustinFrankl » Sat 20 Jan 2007, 03:10:17
NEOPO's a bot. The fact you just wasted so many keystrokes responding to this program probably has its authors rolling on the floor laughing. Just ignore him. Same thing goes for 'RAPHAEL' - another bot.
Anyone who isn't a machine, biological or otherwise, please raise your hand.
"We have seen the enemy, and he is us." -- Walt Kelly
- JustinFrankl
- Tar Sands
- Posts: 623
- Joined: Mon 22 Aug 2005, 03:00:00
Re: Bloggers Who Criticize Government May Face Prison
by cynicalheretic » Sat 20 Jan 2007, 12:21:23
* raises hand
I am not a bot, but I am insane. I also think that somebody in the administration allowed the attacks to happen. I just don't know who or 100% for sure why they would do this.
I am not a bot, but I am insane. I also think that somebody in the administration allowed the attacks to happen. I just don't know who or 100% for sure why they would do this.
- cynicalheretic
- Permanently Banned
- Posts: 594
- Joined: Thu 02 Nov 2006, 04:00:00
Re: Congress considers jailing grassroot critics
by Jack » Sat 20 Jan 2007, 16:10:39
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ElijahJones', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jack', 'I') am still in favor of holding the government accountable, but government in and of itself is not the enemy of liberty.
True enough. Government is a necessary part of a complex society. Government done well can be beneficial.
If one takes a look at the body of law, one notes that they are tools, of a sort. They can be used for a variety of good and useful purposes; one depends on law enforcement officers, prosecutors, and the court system to keep the usage reasonable and to correct misuse (or abuse) of the various tools.
All of the foregoing said, I find it interesting that a trend exists - has existed for decades - that potentially permits governmental bodies to be more intrusive, and to exercise greater control. Arguably, the great mass of people do not object to such a state of affairs. Clearly, there is no groundswell of opposition.
My point is not that we have a problem today; rather, we are creating the foundation for possible future problems. We are putting in place the various tools and mechanisms that some hypothetical future ruler(s) could abuse to our detriment.
Will this happen? I haven't the slightest. Predicting the future is a good way to learn humility. But the founders of these United States had a suspicion of any concentration of power, and created a system of checks and balances. I think it is reasonable to respect their views.
A bill that, potentially, limits the ability of the public to criticize congress has - in my opinion - the potential to undercut first amendment rights. This, again in my opinion, could reduce the involvement of the mass of citizens in the workings of government, and thus might permit abuses.
If you disagree with an element of the foregoing response, all more serious than my initial posting, please tell me more.
![[smilie=new_popcornsmiley.gif]](https://udev.peakoil.com/forums/images/smilies/new_popcornsmiley.gif "new_popcornsmiley")
- Jack
- Light Sweet Crude
- Posts: 4929
- Joined: Wed 11 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
