posted on Jun, 27 2010 @ 01:31 AM
Originally posted by Raist
reply to post by LurkingSleipner
First - "insert rediculous number" for not paying attention.
Where did I state anything about what was morally right or wrong? I do not even recall using the word moral in my post. Why insinuate I am putting
something in my post that is not there.
I never said anything about the shirt being moral or not. I said respect the rules that are set before you when you go some place. Your reply makes
little sense other than ramblings of someone who feels “offended” by someone “pushing” morals down their throat when there was nothing of the
sort taking place.
Facts are you know before you go to court the rules of dress that are in place. If you are not bright enough to follow those rules you are not bright
enough to participate in the judgment of what another person’s future will hold for them. Simple enough?
Let me say it again.
If you are not intelligent or mature, enough to read and follow rules set before you you have no business making decisions in another’s life.
Putting on something that would be less distracting is not that difficult a task and does not seem to much to ask either.
First if you do not understand the width and breadth of my post you patently are ignorant in regards to the basis of both my post and your original
one replied to, i indeed find it possible for you to post without understanding the true measure of your entire post. Morality is the basis of it
together with values and ideals.
The basis of your post was a moral stage on which you find respect to the authority, i.e the judge, to appear as the be all and end all for this
supposed private property. For when he has dictatorial rule over the room it is indeed not the peoples property if he has dictatorial rule, as
Muzzleflash has stated.
My statements of the ignorance is not to offend you, simply to show you lack the comprehension skills to read others posts and compare the entirety in
a sense towards the topic as a whole. You seem unwilling to accept conjecture, which is indeed well written and presented to you, by simply stating it
I am not offended by your writing. I'm simply distressed as the attitude shown form your posts presents a mental faculty shared by many Americans.
That of simplicity and herd mentality obeying something because it is a law or obeying someone because they have authority.
They do not have complete and utter control over you unless you allow it. They have no power, they are simply a conductor through which the peoples
power is funneled and molded.
The problem though as i stated is that many Americans share that attitude and ideals contrary to the founding of this country. The country was based
on questioning authority and fighting injustices, by breaking the bonds of mans inhumanity to man and working towards a common goal of setting up a
more perfect union, based inside of a republic. If the founding fathers could see our laziness and our fondness to sit idly or out rightly fight for
the ideals of an oppressive government they worked so hard to original fight against they would be saddened beyond words.
Is this more clear to you? Shall I summarize the issue at hand here?
Basically you cannot have restrictions on god given rights through legislation. That is the first step towards oppressive government and fascism. If
you allow one iota or tic to be shaven from our natural rights then it is a downward path we journey upon. And furthermore this judge is legislating
form the bench, using prior legislation to back his opinion based rulings to hold those in contempt of court or to dismiss a juror or any other action
he may take.