[Whit]

     Thanks Griff, that's quite interesting. It's a solid arguement Washington makes as well. Without religion you can't have a "National Morality" because without religion telling you what's right and wrong you have to make that decision individualy. Of course being a non-religious individualist I'm okay with that.

     Hey Radar, motivations matter because that's where changes are made. To use your analagy if we can understand the motivations of one person that drowns five kids then we have a chance to recognize the next such sick individual and stop them before five more kids drown. Also from the point of discussion if you ignore motivation then you're ranting, which is okay. Just don't expect your opinion to spread.

     For instance, you could ask how it is that our right-wing Dwellars fight for all of our rights to bear arms, as per the Constitution, but seem okay with the goeverment taking people and locking them up without legal representation. I can't remember the name of the guy who's lawyer tried to fight this, and failed, because I'm full of flu meds right now. Somebody help me out or I'll look it later when the brain is working better. This is a clear violation of the Bill of Rights, so ask why they can be incensed over one and not the other. Then it's a discussion, the ball is in their court. Not a rant. Difference being, if you have a valid veiwpoint discussing it is how it spreads. A rant just makes likeminded people go "YEAH" and everyone else rolls their eyes and becomes less likely to listen next time.