Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

The true mentality of a protester.

  • Thread starter Thread starter ariolanine
  • Start date Start date
A

ariolanine

Guest
Here is a quote from the article below.

"I think if we're weighing hundreds of thousands of lives abroad to one person who may have a heart attack and the ambulance may arrive a little bit later because of a street blockade - I think it's much more serious to be really saying that it's not cool to be killing hundreds of thousands of people in another country," said Liana Foxvog of Reed Student Peace Action Network.

http://www.katu.com/news/story.asp?ID=55615
 
buddy28 said:
I think what she's trying to say is the good of the many outweighs the good of the few.


So you value your life so little that you are willing to die so that spoiled rich wanna be hippies from a $30,000/Year liberal arts college can block traffic in a futile attempt to change US foreign policy?
 
ariolanine said:



So you value your life so little that you are willing to die so that spoiled rich wanna be hippies from a $30,000/Year liberal arts college can block traffic in a futile attempt to change US foreign policy?

sounds like you got some issues.
 
buddy28 said:


sounds like you got some issues.


Like what douche? Do you live in a city where people are going to try and disrupt your commute to work?
 
Here in America, your right to free speech ends where even one person's right to life is infringed - period.


I have no problem with peace protesters speaking out. That's one of the right's our boys in the desert are fighting to guarantee. However, as I said, when it infringes on the rights of others you must step aside.

Liana Foxvog would feel different if the ambulance impeded by the street blockade was trying to respond to a life threatening emergency with her mother, father, grandparent, brother, sister, or child.
 
buddy28 said:
I think what she's trying to say is the good of the many outweighs the good of the few.
BTW, this is exactly the principal by which the soldiers on the battlefield understand and accept that their lives may be sacrificed.
 
Sinistar said:
all that bottled up righteousness, and the best thing he can utter is douchebag.

devastating logic.


Isn't it though. I thought long and hard on the right word choice.


BTW, what about my original post do you disagree with, seriously?
 
"It's taken action, both legal and illegal action to make every single positive social change that's occurred in US history. And if we're serious about creating positive social change in stopping this war it's going to take legal and also illegal means to do that."

First, let me say this is an extremely dangerous attitude. I wonder if he would agree with his own statement when someone else with whom he didn't agree used it as justification. For example, when I beat him within an inch of his life for blocking my car at a bridge. :D
 
Silent Method said:
Here in America, your right to free speech ends where even one person's right to life is infringed - period.


I have no problem with peace protesters speaking out. That's one of the right's our boys in the desert are fighting to guarantee. However, as I said, when it infringes on the rights of others you must step aside.

Liana Foxvog would feel different if the ambulance impeded by the street blockade was trying to respond to a life threatening emergency with her mother, father, grandparent, brother, sister, or child.

I agree. preventing emergency services from doing their job or interfereing with peoples lively hoods that depend roads and highways is plain wrong. Some dude who has to deliver beer or consumeable goods doesn't need to make his life any more difficult by peace protesters.
 
buddy28 said:
I think what she's trying to say is the good of the many outweighs the good of the few.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, but the needs of one outweigh the needs of all when one's rights are concerned.

That man in the ambulance has the right to live, and his right will be protected to the best of a doctor's ability if he arrives to a hospital in time. These protesters are breaking the law with their demonstrations (which makes me wonder why they aren't being arrested), and as such, their needs are rescinded.

The goal of this Republic as it was formed 200 yrs ago was to ensure that the needs of the many aren't recklessly attended to. Allowing someone to die in an ambulance is a good example of this recklessness.

-Warik
 
Warik said:


The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, but the needs of one outweigh the needs of all when one's rights are concerned.

That man in the ambulance has the right to live, and his right will be protected to the best of a doctor's ability if he arrives to a hospital in time. These protesters are breaking the law with their demonstrations (which makes me wonder why they aren't being arrested), and as such, their needs are rescinded.

The goal of this Republic as it was formed 200 yrs ago was to ensure that the needs of the many aren't recklessly attended to. Allowing someone to die in an ambulance is a good example of this recklessness.

-Warik

are you lecturing me?
 
If the war protestors go as so far as to stop the military and/or emergency services workers from doing their duties to help Americans, they are no longer civil, peaceful protestors but enemies of the state.
 
Top Bottom