| Fish Tank Clan :: Forums :: Fish Tank Side Forums :: Philosophy |
|
« Previous topic | Next topic » |
| Crime and Punishment | ||
| Author | Post | ||
| Merzon |
|
||
Registered Member #981
Joined: Sun Feb 03 2008, 04:10AMPosts: 32 |
"It seems that you MUST not only commit illegal and immoral acts" For that statement, then must it be true that MLK jr. actions were immoral? Because due to human err the laws at the time were flawed, and laws can always be negotiated as right or wrong. I think a lot of the time to make a HUGE break in the trend society takes is breaking the law. BUT BUT BUT! not always immoral. the reason we have to change society is because we create government to serve us. and when the laws that are there to help us, are in themselves immoral, then we must change the laws. and since it is the custom of the land to obey this rules [ex racism before MLKjr], one must break the custom to make a change. this can only be done by breaking the law. i have no problem with breaking the law ONLY is the law is flawed. There are two distinct catagories, immoral and illegal. Immoral actions are always Illegal but Illegal actions are not always Immoral. This is where the problem lies with changing society for the betterment of people. you have to break the CUSTOMS of the people if you want the change to be effective. but this is not immoral by any means. |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| NoSkill |
|
||
Sir
Registered Member #457
Joined: Tue Oct 10 2006, 01:13PMPosts: 2628 |
Well merzon... yes MLK's actions were immoral if you use the definition of the word. immoral - violating moral principles; not conforming to the patterns of conduct usually accepted or established as consistent with principles of personal and social ethics. As they were illegal, but isn't that what made them great? Isn't that why this man is revered as one of the greatest men who have lived in recent memory? But we're getting away from my point. How is a man, through the transgression of current laws and morals(regardless of what they are) supposed to succeed in his goal, if society, the direct benefactor of his actions, tries to stop him the entire way? You steal to help the poor, you're put in jail. You kill for a noble and just cause, you're put in jail. You break out of jail so you can continue to try and help society, you're put in more secure and remote jail. There seems to be no distinction. If I go out and round up a group of a dozen nuns and systematically execute everyone of them, I'll get the death penalty. If I go out and round up a group of a dozen corrupt politicians making unfair and unjust laws to further their own wealth and systematically execute everyone of them, not only will I get the death penalty but I'll get it FASTER. In the eyes of the law, there is no difference, at least not in punishment. But in the eyes of anyone who can see, there should be a very discernable difference, one resulted in zero good being accomplished, another resulted in a multitude of good being accomplished. |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
| peacebypeice |
|
||
peacebypeice
Registered Member #925
Joined: Mon Nov 26 2007, 05:23AMPosts: 1452 |
NoSkill... fuck me.... now | ||
| Back to top |
|
||
| Zero |
|
||
I want to fuck your hand.
Registered Member #571
Joined: Thu Feb 15 2007, 09:59PMPosts: 2809 |
NoSkill wrote ... But we're getting away from my point. How is a man, through the transgression of current laws and morals(regardless of what they are) supposed to succeed in his goal, if society, the direct benefactor of his actions, tries to stop him the entire way? You steal to help the poor, you're put in jail. You kill for a noble and just cause, you're put in jail. You break out of jail so you can continue to try and help society, you're put in more secure and remote jail. There seems to be no distinction. Well I also find that greatness comes from adversity. I mean, how many cases have you seen where people stricken with great poverty and horrible resources grow up into amazing people. That is why these deeds become that much greater, because do they not only face normal adversity, they face almost all adversity. this old lady he killed... she was nothing. to me I dont find that right. Yes, she was wretchid. Only thing that comes to mind is that lady from the Lord of the Rings in the shire that always hated frodo and sam and all of them, and always gave them a scowl. But was that enough to get her murdered? I mean, even when they got home after doing all those great deeds, that bitch scowled in their faces!! and they smiled because they missed her, and they didnt care how she felt about them. But that does not make it okay to kill her. We keep talking about higher instances of important people, but this old bitch wasnt important at all, and didnt deserve it. to me I dont find that right. "Have love in your heart." yes the old lady was a bitch, but how many times did this guy try and change her? simply by having an amazing attitude did he try and help her to be nice? doesnt sound like it, he didnt have love in his heart. Instead he took her anger and filth and let it into his own heart to catalyst the hate he would later use to kill her. I heard a quote today... that made me think of this thread. "if you can kill a demon, you can kill a saint." Meaning, just because you find it right to kill evil, its still the same act if it was on something good, therefor it should be no different. The choice made should also be no different... |
||
| Back to top |
|
||
Powered by e107 Forum System
|
|