Whoa! Here's a radical thought!

Post #5,159 by Brandioch 8/14/01 4:35:41 PM Reply	Whoa! Here's a radical thought! I was thinking over it and I thought back to the other examples I had posted and I thought.... Well, you know how I was talking about people freeing slaves when it was illegal? And how the US revolution was illegal? Well, I was thinking, why no do something like they did? Why not continue doing what I believe is right AND get the law changed? Is that fucking radical or what? Now, I'd still be a "criminal", but the rights I have inherent would be recognized by the authorities. Gee, I don't know WHY I didn't think of that sooner.
Post #5,164 by Fearless Freep 8/14/01 4:55:05 PM 8/14/01 4:56:03 PM Reply	Been waiting for that one I was curious when you would put all the pieces together. If...rights are only expressable through the whim of those in power to grant or deny your expression of them. and if there is a difference between moral righteousness and legal rights and if you think a morally righteous thing should be a legal right Then the only two morally right courses of action are a) legal change and b) civil disobedience. (and I mentioned a) a long time ago and b) not too long ago also ) Jay O'Connor "Going places unmapped to do things unplanned to people unsuspecting" Edited by Fearless Freep Aug. 14, 2001, 04:56:03 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #5,177 by Brandioch 8/14/01 5:54:34 PM Reply	I was much older then, I'm younger than that now. "I was curious when you would put all the pieces together." I was hoping for better, but it was just a silly hope. "If...rights are only expressable through the whim of those in power to grant or deny your expression of them." No. All that the government can do is to facilitate their expression or punish their expression. "and if there is a difference between moral righteousness and legal rights" Yes, there is. "and if you think a morally righteous thing should be a legal right" That would be ideal. "Then the only two morally right courses of action are a) legal change and b) civil disobedience. (and I mentioned a) a long time ago and b) not too long ago also )" Hmmmmmm, why don't you try doing a search on my postings about painting cameras? Then check the dates on those posts. Today, you arrived at "civil disobedience" as a means to achieve my goals. Which was my original posting, many many many moons ago.
Post #5,181 by Fearless Freep 8/14/01 6:09:28 PM Reply	because Which was my original posting, many many many moons ago. If you look at my first post to you you said "You cannot photograph me. You cannot film me." and I merely pointed out that I could indeed photgraph and film you currently, technically, legally. I didn't care if you would use civil disobedience or try to change the law. My only point is that you say "cannot" to what is currently very much a "can". and it's your use of a verb tense to insist that right now it cannot be done when what you really seem to mean is that yuo wish it couldn't be done or you'd like it not to be done or wouldn't it be nice if it wasn't done or whatever you really mean, your statement is wrong. That was it Jay O'Connor "Going places unmapped to do things unplanned to people unsuspecting"
Post #5,189 by Brandioch 8/14/01 6:39:38 PM Reply	You cannot shoot me. You cannot stab me. You cannot kick me. You cannot beat me with a stick. Ah, you think. But I can. I can't do it legally, but I can still do it. And, under the correct circumstances, I can even do it legally. Context, Jay. Context.

Welcome to IWETHEY!