“Twelve religious activists pulled off a legal miracle yesterday: They convinced a judge - who once worked for the Philadelphia Police Department, of all places - that it's OK to break the law if the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing.”
Read the whole thing…and think about it.
My ponderings?
I should premise the following by saying that just because I raise the question, it in no way serves as to any clue to my beliefs. Don’t try to get inside my head, you’ll just get lost. I’m simply taking the logic from this decision and extrapolating.
Is it OK to bomb an abortion clinic because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”
Is it OK to bomb a school which teaches evolution because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”
Is it OK to kill gays serving openly in the military because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”
Is it OK to kill people who drive an SUV because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”
Is it OK to destroy someone else’s SUV because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”
Is it OK to hunt down and kill hunters because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”
THAT is what this decision gives precedent to. Let’s have some hypothetical fun, shall we. These are not my views, but the apparent views of Municipal Court Judge Karen Yvette Simmons.
It is now OK to kill members of organizations who strive every day to chip away at my Constitutional Rights because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”
It is now OK to kill members of the legislative branch who strive every day to chip away at my Constitutional Rights because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”
It is now OK to kill members of the judicial branch who strive every day to chip away at my Constitutional Rights because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”
It is now OK to kill members of the executive branch who strive every day to chip away at my Constitutional Rights because you believe “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”
Before I get the predicted response from any wandering posers about the difference between protesting and murder, I would like to remind them that the distinction is not made is this ruling.
All that matters is that one believes “the harm you cause is less than the harm you think you're preventing?”
If that’s not the most dangerous shit you’ve ever read; if that doesn’t make your bones chill, then I shudder at the thought of you exercising your right to vote, even though I will defend your right to vote with my life.
I’m kinda complicated.
2 comments:
I believe it was Niccolo Machiavelli who stated that'
"the end justifies the means." This would seem to be a modern interpretation of the same.
This judge merely took a hint from the Obama administration where "anything" appears to be ok, as long as he gets what he wants i.e. overwhelming statism and socialism.
It seems heeding gods call and Bryan Miller are at it again. They are now targeting the Shooter shop. They plan to protest the shop on the 20th, Since the owner will not sign their code of conduct. Which is a violation of many of our Constitional rights. The owner is my uncle, he is a veteran of our country and an honest man. These people need to get their church out of my 2A rights!!
Post a Comment