Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquila
Politics isn't a religion Jito, there is no "orthodoxy".
|
Politics, no. Party affiliations, yes. Parties are not the government, they are groups of people who come together for a common interest. If you claim to be a member of a party, and then promptly turn around and refute the ideals of that party, then you're betraying that party and what it stands for.
Let's make up an example, say you join a jazz club, and then decide you're only going to play operas (and maybe the occasional bit of jazz). Are you really a member of the jazz club at that point? In what way do you represent the ideals of the jazz club?
By calling themselves Republicans, they are aligning themselves with the ideals of that party. If they disagree with those ideals, they should start their own party or run as an independent. Like I already said though, they won't, because they don't want to give up the election funds they receive from the party.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquila
Where did I say that it was morally justifiable??? This is an outright lie.
|
You're right, you didn't say it was morally justifiable, you said morally "obligated".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aquila
Can you see how an unhinged individual might feel morally obligated to use deadly force to send a message?
|
As I already wrote, even if you're saying it's from their perspective, don't you think that might rub some people the wrong way, especially when those "morally obligated" actions always take place against conservatives?
Why would you even use the term "moral" at all? A deranged individual isn't doing something moral, and claiming that they think so doesn't alter the fact that
you called it moral. You could have just said they believed it was justified - and in the mind of the deranged, it may well be - but you went a step further and claimed they believed it was "morally" justified/obligated.
There is nothing moral about committing murder, no matter the mental state of the instigator. I'm not saying you agree with the action, I'm saying there was no reason to use the term "moral" in that context. That's the part I take great exception to.