🚀 go-pugleaf

In dc.general, dougnews@access.digex.com (Doug Humphrey) writes:
>
>This is absolutely incorrect, though often stated.  They
>had great respect for a just law, but they held that an
>unjust law should be opposed.  

What I said is Not *"absolutely"* incorrect. You 
stated that they had respect for *just* law.  That 
qualifies the statement, thus removing any claim
to being absolute.  Respect for just law allows
personal interpretation, therefore it is not respect
for the law.  It is only respect for those laws that
happen to coincide with the individuals judgement
as "just".

>
>>Recall the Boston Tea Party (vandalism, theft),  taring
>>and feathering (assault), and armed rebellion against
>>the government!  A little crack looks like a very trivial
>>think against that backdrop, speaking in terms of
>>respect for law that is.
>
>In any case, the whole Barry question should be, why do the
>people support this guy?

Perhaps one reason might be that it is one way of giving the
finger to those who consistently use their tax money, use
their fathers and mothers as soldiers, and continue to
deny them the rights of other Americans.  It can be
said with justification that those who voted for Barry
have more respect for the law than those who committed
illegal acts under the British.  

-- 
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
                    \ They discovered, one black Saturday,
       LAIR         / The mobs don't march, they run.
                    \			   - The Clash