Civil Disobedience

Perhaps, but the new Republican Administration isn't likely to pass any great socialistic legislation. Quite the contrary, and that is what I think many on the left are afraid of. I expect the Supreme Court to become somewhat more conservative over the next 5-10 years, and that might mean reversal of some decisions that supported "social" legislation. We might see, for instance, some significant reinterpretation of Roe V. Wade. Personally I would hope not, but that could happen.

I think it is a mistake to try and dream up scenarios about what laws are likely to find their way onto, or off of the books in the future. The legislature and courts are typically reactive in nature. Something will happen, or be perceived as happening, and a clamor will arise to do something about it. Thankfully, our system makes it difficult to rush most ideas, programs, and policies into law. The President, under the Constitution, is given extraordinary powers to act when the nation is faced with a crisis. However, that executive power is not without constraint and limit. The Supreme Court has often confounded both the President who may have appointed swing Justices and the legislature who is responding to the demands of the mob. I'll say it again and again, in my estimation the institutions of the country and the Constitution are sound and in good health.

0 Replies

Cyclops, I suggest you do as you say and start in central Texas (just a hunch you're holed up in Austin). Then begin to try and spread your protest across the Lone Star State. We'll see how far you get, LOL!

0 Replies

We will see.

It all depends on the policies which are put in place by the new Bush Administration. If they are a simple continuation of our currently existing policies, a lot of people will be unhappy but it would not raise enough support amongst the populace to drive true civil disobedience.

If, however, we see more and more of the aggresive, nationalistic policies of the Bush admin expanded in the next four years, there will be more and more discontent because of that.

If we see more and more policies designed to funnel monies into the hands of the wealthy, there will be more and more discontent because of that.

If we see more and more policies designed to turn America into a faith-based theocracy, we will see more and more discontent because of that.

The key is to have a support network ready to harness this discontent, and turn it into action. What sort of action depends on the level of discontent. Without a network to support said discontent, we will accomplish nothing; with the network we can do amazing things, from traditional politicing to civil disobedience to revolt, depending on the severity of the situation.

It is not enough to sit around and bitch anymore, Democrats! Take your future into your own hands, climb out of the comfortable little lives we live in, and do something before it is too late!

Quote:

Cyclops, I suggest you do as you say and start in central Texas (just a hunch you're holed up in Austin). Then begin to try and spread your protest across the Lone Star State. We'll see how far you get, LOL!

Texas was a very democratic state for years before the current crop of bible-beating thugs came about. We haven't forgotten.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Bookmark. (Who knows? Maybe I'll have time to read it before they show up. Laughing

)

0 Replies

ebrown, just remember, when you embark on the path of civil disobedience, you MUST be prepared to face prison, hatred, condemnation and pain.

This is part and parcel of the path you are advocating.

Keep in mind, some of the most famous 'civil disobediencers' ended up dead.

Ghandi was one of the greatest men who ever lived, yet he was imprisoned, beaten, vilified and eventually killed.

Doctor Martin Luter King faced similar trials in his civil disobedience and he too ended up dead.

I am not trying to discourage you from speaking out about what you believe in, I AM saying that you need to understand what the consequences of your actions may be.

0 Replies

Given the examples you've given, Fedral, cyclops could end up being one of the most respected human beings ever.

0 Replies

ehBeth wrote:

Given the examples you've given, Fedral, cyclops could end up being one of the most respected human beings ever.

True, but for every Ghandi and MLK there are dozens of anonomous protestors corpses burried in potters field, unmourned and unremembered.

0 Replies

ehBeth wrote:

Given the examples you've given, Fedral, cyclops could end up being one of the most respected human beings ever.

True. But given his list of grievances and militant undertones, Cyclops could end up being one of the least respected human beings ever.

http://www.mugshots.org/criminals/lee-harvey-oswald.jpg

Cycloptichorn wrote:

The rise of the Republican party, and the rise of electronic voting, are not coincidences in my mind.

Cycloptichorn

And you suggested I needed to get over myself? Shocked

I would think you dangerous if I thought there were a snowballs chance in hell of anybody joining your paranoid club. Lucky for you, you have the freedom to even the most idiotic thoughts and worries. With our current technology; if big brother were even half the ogre you fear, he'd already be knocking on your door.

Ps. Here's an appropriate helmet for your army of fools:

http://www.osmond-riba.org/lis/graphics/Tinfoil1.jpg

0 Replies

Cyclops is a self admitted Socialist and what she suggests(civil disobedience with talk of guns) is to subvert the democratic process using "civil disobedience" with the goal of imposing a Socialist-like governing system that the U.S. electorate has repeatedley rejected. She sounds more like a Dictator to me than any sort of "freedom fighter"

The socialists think that they know whats good for people, that they can and will cure social ills by wielding the power of government. That the people have repeatedly denied this notion does not sway them, as Cyclops reaction shows. It makes them even more rabid.

0 Replies

As bad as libs don't want to admit it YOU LOST. The election is over. I had to suffer through 8 years of Clinton and would of suffered through Kerry as well but HE LOST. Do something constuctive and find a democrat to run that can win.

Bush won, fair and square. Staging protests and sit ins are a huge waste. This is not 1950 or 60 you are not hippies, and Iraq is not Vietnam. You missed that time, it is over, don't try and drag us back.

0 Replies

What do you have against socialists?

If you believed in democracy, you'd think you would accept our right to express our views in our free nation. Our nation is supposed to be a Christian nation. As Jesus is the most prominent socialist teacher it seems that people wouldn't have such a hang up.

What gives?

0 Replies

I don't remember reading in the bible that Jesus was affiliated with any party. Is that in Matthew, Mark, Luke or John?

0 Replies

cannistershot wrote:

As bad as libs don't want to admit it YOU LOST. The election is over. I had to suffer through 8 years of Clinton and would of suffered through Kerry as well but HE LOST.

Listen. We accept that the election is over and that we lost.

Quote:

Do something constuctive and find a democrat to run that can win.

Bush won, fair and square. Staging protests and sit ins are a huge waste. This is not 1950 or 60 you are not hippies, and Iraq is not Vietnam. You missed that time, it is over, don't try and drag us back.

The protests in the 60's were quite productive. We have civil rights legislation, great gains in racial equality and a pull out from Vietnam to thank for it.

BTW Iraq is looking an awful lot like Vietnam. A large proportion of the civilian population provides cover and support for the insurgents.

Admittedly there is one big difference between Iraq and Vietnam....

... George W Bush had a good plan to get out of Vietnam.

0 Replies

Very interesting thread, what I've read of it so far....

0 Replies

cannistershot wrote:

I don't remember reading in the bible that Jesus was affiliated with any party. Is that in Matthew, Mark, Luke or John?

All of the above. See the sermon on the mount for example.

Jesus taught that you should pay taxes. He said you should not oppose evildoers and told his followers to sell all of their possessions to give to the poor.

Jesus's followers (directly after he left Earth) lived a pretty socialistic lifestyle... Tell me if this isn't the very definition of socialism.

Acts chapter 2 wrote:

All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.

Read your Bible-- especially the New Testament. It is quite the socialist text.

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

cannistershot wrote:
As bad as libs don't want to admit it YOU LOST. The election is over. I had to suffer through 8 years of Clinton and would of suffered through Kerry as well but HE LOST.

Listen. We accept that the election is over and that we lost.

Quote:

Do something constuctive and find a democrat to run that can win.

Bush won, fair and square. Staging protests and sit ins are a huge waste. This is not 1950 or 60 you are not hippies, and Iraq is not Vietnam. You missed that time, it is over, don't try and drag us back.

The protests in the 60's were quite productive. We have civil rights legislation, great gains in racial equality and a pull out from Vietnam to thank for it.

BTW Iraq is looking an awful lot like Vietnam. A large proportion of the civilian population provides cover and support for the insurgents.

Admittedly there is one big difference between Iraq and Vietnam....

... George W Bush had a good plan to get out of Vietnam.

Please explain to me and the people who fought in Vietnam how they are the same? You liberals want something to protest about so bad that you are grasping at straws. Like I said the 60's are over, they were a terrible time, please don't drag us back. Find a democrat who can win and elect him or her. Zell Miller would be my choice.

0 Replies

I've only given the thread a cursory read. I didn't see where anyone was advocating taking up arms against the state. I would like to see the point clarified before jumping into the discussion.

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

What do you have against socialists?

If you believed in democracy, you'd think you would accept our right to express our views in our free nation. Our nation is supposed to be a Christian nation. As Jesus is the most prominent socialist teacher it seems that people wouldn't have such a hang up.

What gives?

You have every right to express your views and it is my right to express mine. My problem with Socialism is that it punishes the success of an individual in the interests of others. This is folly. This is wrong. From January 1st to mid June, I work my ass of as an indentured servant to the U.S. government. I have spent nearly half my life working to pay the government. Why? For what? What has the Welfare system cured? What does Socialism do besides try and bend people to fit in the Standard Human Mold that the Socialists have contrived. I can guarantee you that I place my families welfare far above the needs and wants of society. I can provide for them far better than any government, but government makes that difficult to do when they tax me like they do. I cant help but feel that that is their goal.

Furthermore, and this may sound weird to some, but Socialism mitigates or denies The Right to Fail. How do you expect anyone to grow and learn when the consequences to ones actions are irrelevant, because there is always a safety net. Where is the incentive to succeed when that success is punished? Do you really think Pride is an adequate motivator? Failure leads to an examination of said failure and, theoretically Razz

, a different strategy on the next go around. It is evolution of thought. I would not be where I am today without that right.

Government cannot dictate humanity. Socialism is contrary to human nature. We are not equal as individuals. The only similarity is biological. The only thing equal about Socialism is that everbody is equally miserable.

0 Replies

ebrown_p wrote:

cannistershot wrote:
I don't remember reading in the bible that Jesus was affiliated with any party. Is that in Matthew, Mark, Luke or John?

All of the above. See the sermon on the mount for example.

Jesus taught that you should pay taxes. He said you should not oppose evildoers and told his followers to sell all of their possessions to give to the poor.

Jesus's followers (directly after he left Earth) lived a pretty socialistic lifestyle... Tell me if this isn't the very definition of socialism.

Acts chapter 2 wrote:

All the believers were together and had everything in common. Selling their possessions and goods, they gave to anyone as he had need. Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved.

Read your Bible-- especially the New Testament. It is quite the socialist text.

I read my Bible everyday, you? I love how Jesus is turned to fit every liberal agenda.

0 Replies

Of course using things out of context was invented by the king of the libs Michael Moore.

0 Replies

Civil Disobedience

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know