We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
is that al megrahi still alive? nearly a year after his release - another lefty
Comments
-
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »
You do however need to respect and uphold the law of whatever country you reside in
If I had lived in Alabama in the 1950s I would have had no respect for the racial segregation laws.
I certainly had no respect for the laws discriminating against homosexuals in the 70s and early 80s in Scotland even though I am not homosexual myself.
I can think of many other statutes which I would be morally obliged to oppose if they were law here.The truth may be out there, but the lies are inside your head. Terry Pratchett
http.thisisnotalink.cöm0 -
adouglasmhor wrote: »If I had lived in Alabama in the 1950s I would have had no respect for the racial segregation laws.
I certainly had no respect for the laws discriminating against homosexuals in the 70s and early 80s in Scotland even though I am not homosexual myself.
I can think of many other statutes which I would be morally obliged to oppose if they were law here.
My word, some people just love to argue and take things to extremes.
By respect, I didn't mean that you had to agree with them, but simply that you had to uphold the law.
Of course you can campaign for a legal change in law.
If no-one was willing to abide by law, what sort of society would we live in?:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
adouglasmhor wrote: »If I had lived in Alabama in the 1950s I would have had no respect for the racial segregation laws.
I certainly had no respect for the laws discriminating against homosexuals in the 70s and early 80s in Scotland even though I am not homosexual myself.
I can think of many other statutes which I would be morally obliged to oppose if they were law here.
I think the application of Godwins law is due
I guess the Death camp administrators were obeying German laws when they dispatched six million.
'Just think for a moment what a prospect that is. A single market without barriers visible or invisible giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the worlds wealthiest and most prosperous people' Margaret Thatcher0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »
Good answer, doesn't actually address the question I asked but good effort anyway.The truth may be out there, but the lies are inside your head. Terry Pratchett
http.thisisnotalink.cöm0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »My word, some people just love to argue and take things to extremes.
By respect, I didn't mean that you had to agree with them, but simply that you had to uphold the law.
Of course you can campaign for a legal change in law.
Or you can protest by breaking the law.IveSeenTheLight wrote: »If no-one was willing to abide by law, what sort of society would we live in?
France what popular comedian is that a quote from?The truth may be out there, but the lies are inside your head. Terry Pratchett
http.thisisnotalink.cöm0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »Interesting use of words.
Certainly saying someone looked like a person is not the same as saying that it was that person.
Indeed there are a host of people who make it their livelyhood to look like another
http://www.splitting-images.com/celebrity_list.html
Eye witness evidence is often unrelaiable, and ID evidence even more so....much enquiry having been made concerning a gentleman, who had quitted a company where Johnson was, and no information being obtained; at last Johnson observed, that 'he did not care to speak ill of any man behind his back, but he believed the gentleman was an attorney'.0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »By respect, I didn't mean that you had to agree with them, but simply that you had to uphold the law.
There are lots of laws that, if passed, I wouldn' uphold....much enquiry having been made concerning a gentleman, who had quitted a company where Johnson was, and no information being obtained; at last Johnson observed, that 'he did not care to speak ill of any man behind his back, but he believed the gentleman was an attorney'.0 -
neverdespairgirl wrote: »There are lots of laws that, if passed, I wouldn' uphold.adouglasmhor wrote: »Or you can protest by breaking the law.
?
As long as you guys were willing to suffer the punishment associated with the crime you'd be committing.
For me, there is a difference between campaigning for something and blatently breaking the law.
You cannot take the law into your own hands:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »As long as you guys were willing to suffer the punishment associated with the crime you'd be committing.
For me, there is a difference between campaigning for something and blatently breaking the law.
You cannot take the law into your own hands
And if the law demanded you do something completely unethical?...much enquiry having been made concerning a gentleman, who had quitted a company where Johnson was, and no information being obtained; at last Johnson observed, that 'he did not care to speak ill of any man behind his back, but he believed the gentleman was an attorney'.0 -
But it all hangs on convicting the right person in the first place. If the wrong person is convicted, it is no deterrent at all. An intending perpetrator will think "I can do this and they will punish someone else".IveSeenTheLight wrote: »I simply believe that we should as a society be less lenient with convicted criminal.
I believe the punishment should suit the crime.
If the punishments were harsher, I believe it would aid a deterrent to crime in the first place.
And that is exactly the issue with this case. It has not made us 1 iota safer. Assuming Megrahi is not the perpetrator [which I think he is not], then the real perpetrators can think that they could do the same again and if anyone was caught and punished it would not be them.Hi, we’ve had to remove your signature. If you’re not sure why please read the forum rules or email the forum team if you’re still unsure - MSE ForumTeam0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards