Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14
  1. #11  
    Power CUer FlaGator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    The Swamps of N. Florida
    Posts
    22,407
    Quote Originally Posted by Rebel Yell View Post
    If a group of people organized with the intention of righting the wrongs in this country today, they would be labeled terrorists. Many on this very sight would jump on the bandwagon of calling for their execution. Terrorist is the second most powerful buzzword in the English language today, right behind racist.
    Righting the wrongs of this country? In the relativistic society in which we live, who determines what is ultimately right or wrong? One man's right is another man's wrong and many, including clergy, tell us that there is no right or wrong, just different perspectives. By that same logic, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

    I believe in Christianity as I believe that the sun has risen: not only because I see it, but because by it I see everything else.
    C. S. Lewis
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #12  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Woodland Park, Colorado, United States
    Posts
    8,563
    Quote Originally Posted by Rebel Yell View Post
    If a group of people organized with the intention of righting the wrongs in this country today, they would be labeled terrorists. Many on this very sight would jump on the bandwagon of calling for their execution. Terrorist is the second most powerful buzzword in the English language today, right behind racist.
    For some reason your post reminded me that liberals don't like labels. They don't like being called liberals for instance. They somehow prefer the "progressive" moniker, although progressive seems to speak of progress and liberal ideology is more about destruction. I just watched Tony Danza on Hannity. What a hopeless liberal he is. He has been made into a typical a useless idiot by the Hollyweird group he runs with.
    Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil.
    C. S. Lewis
    Do not ever say that the desire to "do good" by force is a good motive. Neither power-lust nor stupidity are good motives. (Are you listening Barry)?:mad:
    Ayn Rand
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #13  
    An Adversary of Linda #'s
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    22,891
    Quote Originally Posted by Rebel Yell View Post
    If a group of people organized with the intention of righting the wrongs in this country today, they would be labeled terrorists. Many on this very sight would jump on the bandwagon of calling for their execution. Terrorist is the second most powerful buzzword in the English language today, right behind racist.

    The same was true in Boston in the times of John Hancock ,Sam Adams and James Otis.They didn't call them terrorists but the penalty's were the same.You risk life liberty and what freedom you have left when life under a yoke becomes unbearable for you .Fewer than one hundred people total started the First American rebellion and did it right under the noses of their antagonists.Hancock financed the Continental army from his own pockets and supplied all of General George Washingtons early needs during the first Great American war of rebellion .Hancock was well known to the Boston British General staff and he had had many of their senior officers to his Boston home for meals.While Hancock entertained the British high command his men were often emptying smuggling ships of illegal arms into his many Boston area warehouses.Hancock,Sam Adams and James Otis were all just ordinary men driven by events to become great American patriots .

    Otis's conversion from a conservative royal employee to radical critic is not explained solely in terms of constitutional scruples. In 1761, the newly appointed governor of Massachusetts, Sir Francis Bernard, had selected Thomas Hutchinson to be the new Chief Justice of the colony's Superior Court; the candidacy of James Otis Sr.,his father,was bypassed.

    Fueled both by principle and a desire for revenge, Otis resigned his position in 1761, and accepted a call from Boston merchants to represent them in a fight to prevent the renewal of authority for the writs of assistance. The case was heard in February and Otis, in the fashion of the day, delivered an eloquent five-hour argument in which he maintained that the writs were a violation of the colonist's natural rights and that any act of Parliament that abrogated those rights was null and void. He stated in part:


    A Man's house is his castle; and whilst he is quiet, he is as well guarded as a prince in his castle. This writ, if it should be declared legal, would totally annihilate this privilege. Custom-house officers may enter our houses when they please; we are commanded to permit their entry. Their menial servants may enter, may break locks, bars, and everything in their way; and whether they break through malice or revenge, no man, no court may inquire.

    In attendance at court that day was a young attorney, John Adams,the future President, who would later cite this moment as the first scene in the first act of resistance to oppressive British policies.

    Otis lost the case; the writs of assistance were renewed. However, the matter had been brought to popular attention and few officials in the future were willing to incur public wrath by employing the orders. Otis became an instant celebrity and a month later was elected to a seat in the General Court (legislature). As time passed and the list of American grievances against the Crown grew, Otis played an ever more prominent role in advancing the colonists' interests. In 1764, he headed the Massachusetts committee of correspondence. He also spoke and wrote widely, and won special praise for The Rights of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved (1764), in which he made the case against Parliamentary taxation of the colonies. The following year he was a leading figure at the Stamp Act Congress in New York City

    snip
    In 1769, at the height of his popularity and influence, Otis was pulled from the public stage. He had infuriated a Boston custom-house official with a vicious newspaper attack; the official beat Otis on his head with a cane. For the remainder of his life, Otis was subject to long bouts of mental instability. He was unable to participate in public affairs and spent most of his time wandering through the streets of Boston, enduring the taunts of a populace that had quickly forgotten his contributions. Otis was struck and killed by lightning in May 1783.

    "Thus dies a true American Patriot whatever you may think of his motives !"
    http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1204.html
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #14  
    Senior Member Rebel Yell's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    South GA
    Posts
    5,181
    Quote Originally Posted by FlaGator View Post
    Righting the wrongs of this country? In the relativistic society in which we live, who determines what is ultimately right or wrong? One man's right is another man's wrong and many, including clergy, tell us that there is no right or wrong, just different perspectives. By that same logic, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
    Taking from a working man and giving it to a bum is wrong. Just because the bum likes it don't make it right.

    Taking the guns from our hands, which is an individual right listed out in the constitution, is wrong. And I can tell you, where I'm at, this is the one that will touch off an all out war here.


    A relativistic society is the wrong we talk about. Doing away with right and wrong is, in itself, wrong.
    I feel that once a black fella has referred to white foks as "honky paleface devil white-trash cracker redneck Caspers," he's abdicated the right to get upset about the "N" word. But that's just me. -- Jim Goad
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •