Bush and war crimes

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Robin

I like to see evil corporations bite the dust.

You're just like most of the "impartial" judges I have to contend with all the time here in blue blue King County, WA.

[Archaea]

Existence on this soil confers rights, not mere existence any where in the world.

People have a right to be left alone as long as they leave others alone and respect those rights.

Fundamentally I disagree that government confers rights, because that's the rules and regs, people contract together to confer them.

Those that don't participate in the contract don't confer them nor do they receive any benefit of protection from the contract.

And as for ad hominens if taken seriously then apologies, but I don't see the need for any invocation of the divine in any of our discussions. Except for discussions of religion, we should ignore discussions of religion. If an argument can't stand without a reference to divine, then it's not a very strong argument. If there's not an economic or security issue attached to a public issue, we don't need discussion of divine.

The interesting thing is the Left ignores the Divine except to berate the Right or the Middle or the Libertarian. It's really just another weapon, not someting of meaning.

So in order to avoid becoming like Islam, the invocation of Divine should be reserved for moments of religious introspection.

Obeservant Jews won't even mention his name outside of the Synagogue. So let's ignore this God given rights crap. That's for Church and religious discussion not for interlacing in religious discussion. You'll note most of my antithesis to most legislation is economic.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Existence on this soil confers rights, not mere existence any where in the world.

People have a right to be left alone as long as they leave others alone and respect those rights.

Fundamentally I disagree that government confers rights, because that's the rules and regs, people contract together to confer them.

Those that don't participate in the contract don't confer them nor do they receive any benefit of protection from the contract.

And as for ad hominens if taken seriously then apologies, but I don't see the need for any invocation of the divine in any of our discussions. Except for discussions of religion, we should ignore discussions of religion. If an argument can't stand without a reference to divine, then it's not a very strong argument. If there's not an economic or security issue attached to a public issue, we don't need discussion of divine.

The interesting thing is the Left ignores the Divine except to berate the Right or the Middle or the Libertarian. It's really just another weapon, not someting of meaning.

So in order to avoid becoming like Islam, the invocation of Divine should be reserved for moments of religious introspection.

Obeservant Jews won't even mention his name outside of the Synagogue. So let's ignore this God given rights crap. That's for Church and religious discussion not for interlacing in religious discussion. You'll note most of my antithesis to most legislation is economic.

"God" can be a sort of euphamism generally connoting the good, as in, "Thank God for this rain."

What you are calling "observant Jews" are, I assume, Orthodox Jews. There are plenty of less extreme Jews who consider themselves observant and will say "God" outside the synagogue. It's kind of like saying "observant Mormons practice polygamy."

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

"God" can be a sort of euphamism generally connoting the good, as in, "Thank God for this rain."

But that's the point ... it should not be relied upon as a euphamism in this type of discussion.

[tooblue]

Bush is no guiltier of war crimes than EVERY citizen of the United States, especially in regards to this very issue.

Conservative and liberal alike abdicated their right to stand blameless in the outpouring of national pride following 911. Every argument to the contrary is merely splitting hairs so as to determine degrees of guilt.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

"God" can be a sort of euphamism generally connoting the good, as in, "Thank God for this rain."

What you are calling "observant Jews" are, I assume, Orthodox Jews. There are plenty of less extreme Jews who consider themselves observant and will say "God" outside the synagogue. It's kind of like saying "observant Mormons practice polygamy."

You are being more precise, but I would state depending the level of observancy and place on spectrum that Conservative and Orthodox Jews will not say God or God's name outside of the synagogue.

Some conservatives will, and most Reformed will do almost anything.

As tooblue pointed out, I don't like Republican's invocation of God, some of whom may be sincere, and I especially don't like the left's invocation, whom I believe are mostly insincere.

Leave God in the Churches and home and out of politics. You won't find me riling up the born agains. God aids in our personal conduct but being flip about is irreverent.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by tooblue

Bush is no guiltier of war crimes than EVERY citizen of the United States, especially in regards to this very issue.

Conservative and liberal alike abdicated their right to stand blameless in the outpouring of national pride following 911. Every argument to the contrary is merely splitting hairs so as to determine degrees of guilt.

I think you need to review the definition of war crimes. It requires an action, not merely support. Given that most Americans have no way of controlling directly what happens, your argument is quite the stretch.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Archaea

You are being more precise, but I would state depending the level of observancy and place on spectrum that Conservative and Orthodox Jews will not say God or God's name outside of the synagogue.

Some conservatives will, and most Reformed will do almost anything.

As tooblue pointed out, I don't like Republican's invocation of God, some of whom may be sincere, and I especially don't like the left's invocation, whom I believe are mostly insincere.

Leave God in the Churches and home and out of politics. You won't find me riling up the born agains. God aids in our personal conduct but being flip about is irreverent.

Given that our rights are God-given, I find it difficult to avoid mentioning God's name in this discussion.

I have no idea why you would find it offensive, especially since it is the same language utilized by virtually all of this nation's founders (who were also liberals in their day).

[Robin]

Originally Posted by Archaea

You'll note most of my antithesis to most legislation is economic.

Since you don't believe in natural rights (another name for 'God given' rights), and because you don't have a problem with people being rounded up in foreign countries and imprisoned indefinitely without trial, as long as such an action can be justified in the name of national security, and because you tend to evaluate laws by their economic impact, you should seriously consider promoting American ownership of slaves in foreign countries.

Slavery is great for our economy, and what strengthens our economy also strengthens our national security. Of course we would have to rent some land in a foreign country to keep the slaves, since slavery is against the law in the country, but that shouldn't be a problem. We could send of of the rightless illegals in this country to the slave colony where they could be of good use to Americans. I suppose we could also send all of the Gitmo kids to the slave colony too... who do they think they are? Everyone has to work for dinner.

And I hear that human flesh is actually tasty.

[tooblue]

Originally Posted by hoyacoug

I think you need to review the definition of war crimes. It requires an action, not merely support. Given that most Americans have no way of controlling directly what happens, your argument is quite the stretch.

You are not the victim here! The line between action and support is too thin to slice ... we are talking about your --as you say-- God given right to subsist in a manner consistent with your culture ... The required action you speak of is part an parcel of your daily life.

You are no better than the innocent bystander that witnesses a mugging, and despite ample opportunity, chooses to do nothing about it … you then go on your merry way, to the gas station for your next fill-up and then on to the grocery store for your next purchase.