Bush administration arrests former human shields.

[MrFun]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bush administration arrests former human shields.

Originally posted by skywalker


You are not breaking a law by protesting against it! Where'd you get that idea?

You break a law by doing whatever it is the law says you can't do. For example, if abortions were illegal, and I got an abortion (unlikely, as I'm a guy, but you never know... ), that would be illegal. However, if I and a bunch of other people all held signs protesting for our right to an abortion, that would not be illegal, as I did not perform the prohibited action.

Sigh -- this would not be the first time miscommunication occured between two Apolytoners.


When MLK and his buddies protested against segregation laws by sitting in white sections, guess what laws they violated

.

.

.

.

.

segregation laws.

[Kuciwalker]

That's different. They didn't have freedom of expression (and freedom to vote). Look at the Declaration of Independence. When you are denied freedom of expression and freedom of self-government (the right to vote), you have the inherent right to rebel.

[Japher]

These people comitted Treason by aiding Saddam and should be made to become shields for the wall in front of a firing squad...

[MrFun]

Originally posted by skywalker
That's different. They didn't have freedom of expression (and freedom to vote). Look at the Declaration of Independence. When you are denied freedom of expression and freedom of self-government (the right to vote), you have the inherent right to rebel.

Damn it -- where is Imran when ya need help with legalese nonsense?


Segregation laws -- while repugnant to democracy and equality, were perfectly legal laws in the Southern and Northern states until after the Civil Rights movement abated.

So I don't see why it would be different -- even if those laws were unjust they were still laws.

[Kuciwalker]

They are different because they violated fundamental human rights, which is above and beyond the Constitution.

[MrFun]

But my point is that regardless of whether or not they violate human rights, the law IS the law in the technical, legal sense.

But yes -- those unjust laws certainly call for protest.

[Kuciwalker]

You can protest. You cannot violate the law.

However, I think it is right to violate a law that violates your right to expression or self-government.

[Japher]

Knowing violating a law because you disagree with it does not put you above it.

Protesting is not impeding an action. When that happens the law always steps in.

[Verto]

Consulting with the Iraqi government to see where they should go to best hinder the progress of the US isn't a crime? Please.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by skywalker
You can protest. You cannot violate the law.

However, I think it is right to violate a law that violates your right to expression or self-government.

Yes -- can't you see that I'm agreeing with you that protesting unjust laws is justified?


Where we disagree it seems, is that I still say it is violating the law, even if that violation is justified.

[Kuciwalker]

Protesting ANY law is justified.

However, violating the law is only justified if the law violates one of the two freedoms I mentioned.

[oedo]

Originally posted by skywalker
They are different because they violated fundamental human rights, which is above and beyond the Constitution.

a blacklist of countries, you´re not allowed to travel to actually violates fundamental human rights.
denying the right to get food and drink in order to survive in an indexed foreign country actually violates fundamental human rights.

and I still don´t know why exactly they will be accused for now. unauthorized traveling? buying food in Iraq in order to survive? or illegal commercial trades and investments? anyone who knows?

[Kuciwalker]

a blacklist of countries, you´re not allowed to travel to actually violates fundamental human rights.
denying the right to get food and drink in order to survive in an indexed foreign country actually violates fundamental human rights.

How? How does it violate your freedom of expression or right to self-government?

[oedo]

How? How does it violate your freedom of expression or right to self-government?

in this case it would violate my freedom to travel to Iraq anytime I like or need.
can you describe a more evident violation of freedom than a law that prohibits me from going or being somewhere and penalizing tresspassers with jailtime?

[Kuciwalker]

freedom to travel to Iraq anytime I like or need

How does it violate your freedom of expression or right to self-government?