Decius wrote:
] Vile wrote:
] ] What's wrong with a little coercion?
]
] You just got through ranting for a large run on paragraph
] about how you don't want these people using the great lawn in
] central park.
]
] Coercion is the whole problem. I ought to be free to make my
] own choices. I ought to be free from coercion either by
] government or by radical group.
]
] ] You'd decry the Boston Tea Party if it happened today.
]
] Of course I would. There is a significant difference between
] what was going on in the early 1770's and what is going on in
] the early 2000's. The difference is that we have elected
] representatives, and a right to freedom of speech.
]
] In most cases what coercion means for these people is
] preventing others from meeting and preventing others from
] speaking. They seek to counteract rights that are far more
] important then their partisan politics. These people do not
] beleive in freedom of speech for their enemies. They are
] constantly infuriated that corporations like Nike can express
] a view on a political matter just like they can, and their
] rationalizations for that kind of thinking are a bottomless
] mush of self contradictory misunderstandings of what
] organizations are, what corporations are, and what rights are.
] The bottom line, when you cut through all the crap, is that
] they think rights apply only to people they like, and only
] when they want them to apply.
]
] In the 1770's you had a forgien government which imposed its
] will on the domestic government for its own financial benefit.
] People did not have the ability to change the situation
] through a democratic process. They could not operate by
] changing minds and changing votes. The only option they had
] was to remove the forgien government by force. If thats
] legitimate, then other forms of coercive protest are legitmate
] as well.
]
] But you can't get there unless you decide its reasonable to
] overthrow the government. Its not. These people could get what
] they wanted non-violently if they could convince a large
] enough segment of the population that they are right. They
] cannot because they are not. And they'll never understand that
] because radicals are not usually any good at thinking
] critically about their own side.
]
] So they will continue to commit attrocious actions, and I will
] continue to be unimpressed with them, and unsympathetic when
] their asses end up in jail.

I don't think they will care about your position.

RE: FREEWAYBLOGGER.com - Free Speech: Use It or Lose It