A momentous occasion (Page 3)

I agree Jim but I don't think that disputes the reasoning for this right. 

If I remember my American History correctly, the Founding Fathers didn't think our system of goverment would last more than 100 years.

My point is that, IMO, that logic is now outdated based on the enormity of the country, and the power of its military.

And yeah...I remember reading that too.

this is better than burritos

So what's the point, then, of having a system to ammend it? And you said earlier that you'd be in favor of ammending the right to bear arms?

Yeah...I truly don't get that either. But, the way I've heard it rationalized is that in the original hebrew, "kill" meant "murder." I think that's just rationalization, though, personally. I say you can't have it both ways.

Good question!

I'd say that the process of ammending the constitution is so difficult now, that it helps to put a brake on ideological tampering.

Isn't it two thirds of the states that need to ratify an ammendment? I'd hope that the process of getting those two thirds would create enough of a dialogue that as a country we would make a wise decision.

I think the only bad decision we made was prohibition, but we got that straightened out.

For example, I would vote for a Right to Life ammendment. I recognize that at this time in history it would not pass. That's probably as it should be. I'm not interested in a civil war.

However, since the question is so unsettled, it seems to me that it can be worked out at the state level. So, we'd have the same situation that we have with the death penalty. Some states would allow abortion and others would not. I think that the various cultures within individual states would help to calm civil unrest. I don't see California or New York, for example, banning abortion.

Jim, you could have made that same argument 200 years ago. Our puny militia versus a world power like England. What could our meager arms do against them. Thank Buddha the French stepped in. Vive le France!

You are also thinking strictly national. At the local and state level we have despots. Think George McGovern who supported liberty and justice for some. I believe it was Jefferson who said... wait let me get the exact quote...

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

I'm sure he intended the patriots to have the means to refresh that tree. Hence, the right to bear arms.

• A just war can only be waged as a last resort. All non-violent options must be exhausted before the use of force can be justified.
• A war is just only if it is waged by a legitimate authority. Even just causes cannot be served by actions taken by individuals or groups who do not constitute an authority sanctioned by whatever the society and outsiders to the society deem legitimate.
• A just war can only be fought to redress a wrong suffered. For example, self-defense against an armed attack is always considered to be a just cause (although the justice of the cause is not sufficient--see point #4). Further, a just war can only be fought with "right" intentions: the only permissible objective of a just war is to redress the injury.
• A war can only be just if it is fought with a reasonable chance of success. Deaths and injury incurred in a hopeless cause are not morally justifiable.
• The ultimate goal of a just war is to re-establish peace. More specifically, the peace established after the war must be preferable to the peace that would have prevailed if the war had not been fought.
• The violence used in the war must be proportional to the injury suffered. States are prohibited from using force not necessary to attain the limited objective of addressing the injury suffered.
• The weapons used in war must discriminate between combatants and non-combatants. Civilians are never permissible targets of war, and every effort must be taken to avoid killing civilians. The deaths of civilians are justified only if they are unavoidable victims of a deliberate attack on a military target.

That's according to St. Augustine. It's not, however, according to the Commandments. Do you call yourself an Augustinian or a Christian?

Also, I said "instigating" war.

Not to turn this into a Roe v. Wade hijack, but there was a recent editorial in USAToday that pointed out that it would make very little difference whether that decision were overturned or not. In certain deep red states, it is already virtually impossible to find an abortion provider. In other deep blue states, it is very unlikely that abortion will ever be banned.

That's an interesting point.

I would like to be able to vote on it here in Pennsylvania.  I think it would be made illegal here, and it is very much available right now.

Nah, it's because everyone fears my wrath!

I jest, I jest! Just poking fun at myself.

One of my favorite comedies from the 70s was "Start the Revolution Without Me" with Gene Wilder and Donald Sutherland. Utter nonsense. I loved it!