Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Undertoad
So you and I, we can say whatever we like on a message board, and you're right, it means dick. But if a city council does it, that's a whole 'nother league there.
We should have the best Marines we can possibly find. And we should use them correctly if they have to be used at all.
|
Why is the action of the BCC held to a different standard? Why should the BCC help (or hinder) the Marines at all? Isn't it more unpatriotic that a city council defy the wishes of the electorate?
They're following the law. I haven't heard any dispute as to this point. Beyond that is the very difficult area of legislating moral behavior.
How do you feel about gambling and prostitution? Those are subject that are often associated with highly polarized moral positions? Certainly some feel that the *legal* activities in these areas, in Nevada, for example, is immoral. What to do, besides saying whatever we like on a message board? Vote. That's what.
And I have another question for you: what is the connection you're making between moral and patriotic behavior? How are these two related? What happens to the "moral" stance of support for the Marines/war/administration/etc when the law changes? When the legitimate governing authority makes rules/laws/ordinances that are different from what's in place today? Does the moral action of yesterday become immoral today,
by law?
Geeze, UT.
If you please, would you please give me your answer to your original question? How are actions, whether by citizens or by city councils, judged moral or patriotic?
Actually, I just went and reread your post with my quote. How can *desires* be moral or not or patriotic or not? There can be no freedom of expression if there is no underlying freedom of thought.