[Vision2020] condemning rape redux/FLDS

[Tom Hansen]

I am not necessarily supporting Texas laws, or those "exceptions" implaced 
by the Texas magistrate.  I am simpoly stating that the magistrate is 
enforcing those laws they have sworn to defend.  If people fell that there 
are certain laws, or portionns of laws, that they find unethical, immoral, 
or simply wrong, they have three choices.

1)  Campaign to have a law changed or removed through legislative means.

2)  Vote out those electors who have supported such legislation.

3)  Violate the questionable law and fight it from within the system (an 
approach that was attempted several times in the sixties and failed more 
often than it worked).

I, personally, would opt for option #1, coupled with a slight flavor of #3.

I know what I am speaking about.  Although I am not as active as I used to 
be . . . as recent as Summer '91, from the September 17, 1991 
Spokesman . . .

http://www.tomandrodna.com/photos/SR_091791.jpg

We weren't arrested.  We were merely warned.  What an EFFING waste that 
was.  One major correction, though.  Al Thompson was misquoted in the 
article.  I never was a victim of Agent Orange.  He meant "Sonny Kinsey".  
Sonny Kinsey has since moved back to (of all places) Texas.  All died of 
cancer a few years back after his fourth divorce.

I have been trying to "motivate" some action here in the Palouse, but it 
seems that people are simply too content to sit on their hands.  Oh, yes.  
There are those occasional "feel good" protests in Friendship Square.  
But, preaching to the choir accomplishes NOTHING.

So, don't even imply that I am on the side of the "powers that be".  I 
have been on the other side of that aisle since marches and sit-down 
protests in MacArhtur Park in LA '68.

Some laws need to be changed.  Some laws need to be eliminated.  But until 
people quit sitting on their hands . . .

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho




> 
> Tom,
> 
> You are vigorously defending exceptions to the Fourth Amendment that have
t> aken away our privacy and our rights under the Constitution.  Now 
there's
n> o denying these exceptions exist, and I think we are the less for them. 
An> d for every time an exception is created, there is some crime that is
succe> ssfully prosecuted because of the exception, and I'm sure there are 
people
> who say, 'Good, it's worth it, and we're safer now.'
> 
> I just want to point out that the same rationale can be used to defend
ever> y  aspect of the Patriot Act.  The government tells us we're safer 
as they
> intrude into our privacy.  
> 
> That's the bottom line.  
> 
>
Sunil

---------------------------------------------
This message was sent by First Step Internet.
           http://www.fsr.com/