Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 17 to 22 of 22

Thread: Allow "Evil"?

  1. #17
    Newbie Stormraven may be famous one day Stormraven may be famous one day
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Utah
    Posts
    72
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by youth_anime_fan
    Is it ok for america to restrict the rights of people like nazis and communists?
    I assume you're speaking of people within america.

    The thing about nazis and communists and so on, is that they have exact same rights under the law as anyone else. Yes, they have different beliefs than the majority and are likely to be extremely frustrated by that.

    So what.

    If they're frustrated, so are a lot of other interest groups and political activists, all of whom have the exact same options under law; to work with the system to change it, to convince enough people that it ought to be changed.

    Anything else is breaking not only the law of the land, but also the moral law that says no one has the right to force their beliefs on others.

    And for those who argue that America is forcing its beliefs on its citzens, I say two things:

    1) If you don't like it - change it. America is one of the few countries where that's not only possible but encouraged.

    2) The only place you'll find complete freedom is anarchy. But anarchy is an inherently unstable state, either because someone decides they want to be top dog and starts employing less than desirable means to become it, or because enough people don't want someone else to be top dog and band together to fight back. Instant government. The only real choice we have is what kind of government we're going to allow, not whether we get one at all.

    And when it comes down to it, Nazis and communists and others like them favor forms of government that are far more restrictive than the US, and our government has not only the right, but the duty to oppose their spread within our borders. Because one of the duties of a government is to protect its people's rights. As long as it too works within the system.

  2. #18
    Grouchy Old Anime Otaku LenMiyata has become well known LenMiyata has become well known LenMiyata has become well known LenMiyata's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Silicon Valley, California
    Posts
    5,477
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 172 Times in 147 Posts
    Grumble Grumble Grumble

    For systems of goverment that recognize the concept of individual 'human rights', the issue of individual freedoms vs. the good of the majority has always been one of the fundemental issues. If you start with the most extreme issues (which are the most fun to think up...), it's easy to demonstrate that restrictions of some sort must be imposed....

    Take as an example....

    Does freedom of speach include the right to shout 'FIRE' in a crowded movie theater?!?!

    Does freedom of religion protect the use of 'human sacrifice' (a religious ritual dating back to pre-history...)

    Another issue with individual freedoms and the creation (and the wording) of laws is the problem of selective enforcement. If a law is designed to restrict 'communists' and 'nazis', then why can't the law be applied aganst 'right wing Republican' or 'Democrats', or 'Tree Huggers' or 'Little old ladies that play bingo' or....

    Laws that are designed for selective enforcement only encourage the abuse of power within the authoritative agency. (The Supreme Court ruling on the concept of 'Seperate but equal' on segregated education funding is one of the landmark rulings on this issue....) In the US, if a law is cannot be enforced in a fair and impartial manner, it has a good chance of being challenged and over-turned by the courts for failing to meet the requirements for 'due process'
    FAVOURITE THREADS EXPLAIN why, or risk an infraction.
    Rantings of a Grouchy Old Anime Otaku

  3. #19
    Strange Times Dark. is making a name for themselves Dark. is making a name for themselves Dark.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    2,172
    Thanks
    17
    Thanked 88 Times in 71 Posts
    Restrictions on nazis and communists in general, would make us no better than what nazis did to jews, and how communists control their people.

    "Evil" as this thread's referring to is just simply the part of ying and yang. no one's completely "good" no one's completely "evil" evil could vary from person to person, culture to culture, but if we truly want equality for all, we have to accept everyone, even the "bad" people.

  4. #20
    Newbie jkun17 may be famous one day jkun17 may be famous one day
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    San Francisco, CA, USA
    Posts
    60
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    I think I'll reply -- but first, a quote:

    "Those who are willing to surrender a little freedom for a little security
    are deserving of neither freedom or security"

    -- attr. Benjamin Franklin

    In any society, you can have either Equality or Freedom. Both is impossible. Freedom is the ability to do whatever you want and be whomever you want to be (not to be confused with Liberty which is exercise of freedom to the extent that you do not infringe on the freedom of others). Equality is all members of society living in the same conditions (communism).

    In the US, we have some degree of Freedom and some degree of Equality but neither we, nor any other country, has absolute Freedom or Equality.

    "Necessary Evils" are just that -- Evil. Plain and simple. Was nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki Evil? Yes absolutely. Was it necessary? Well... yes and no. Yes because we would have had ot fight all the way up through Japan, No because a naval blockade could have had the same result. (Don't get me wrong, I'm not a WWII apologetist, the Japanese did a lot of abhorrent and evil things on their part too.)

    Was the constant bombing of Dresden Evil? Yes absolutely. Was it Necessary? No, Dresden was a civilian town with no military installations whatsoever.

    Was the bombing of London Evil? Yes. Was it Necessary? No.

    Was WWII Evil? Yes. Was it Necessary? In terms of ending a greater evil, Yes.

    ... but I digress.

    What is Evil is relative, what is necessary is subjective.

  5. #21
    Lady Barronmore Arrianna has become well known Arrianna has become well known Arrianna has become well known Arrianna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,259
    Thanks
    19
    Thanked 140 Times in 108 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by jkun17
    "Necessary Evils" are just that -- Evil. Plain and simple. Was nuking Hiroshima and Nagasaki Evil? Yes absolutely. Was it necessary? Well... yes and no. Yes because we would have had ot fight all the way up through Japan, No because a naval blockade could have had the same result. (Don't get me wrong, I'm not a WWII apologetist, the Japanese did a lot of abhorrent and evil things on their part too.)
    Actually a Navel blockade would have failed. Within a week of the surrender a storm hit that would have completely destroyed the entire US fleet if they had not been in safe harbor.

    Just for your information.

    Please go back to your regular schedualed thread....

    l Stone Hold l Now We're Cooking! l Thanks to Kaos for the awesome sig!

  6. #22
    Banned-looks like you were beat hunh little kid the_weird_one may be famous one day the_weird_one may be famous one day the_weird_one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    No where near anyone.
    Posts
    52
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    yes, it is! we as Americans have so much freedom that we should use that freedom do do what we want! yeah, i am a bit anarchy i guess!

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts