06-03-2021, 01:17 AM
(06-03-2021, 12:00 AM)Dill Wrote: How is rule of law honored in the violation here? Simply ignoring the law =/= civil disobedience.
For you, because you, apparently, only acknowledge "civil disobedience" when you agree with it. Otherwise it's just general law breaking.
Quote:The act has to be politically framed to catch the attention of political authority,*
and the actor then has to accept punishment as defined by existing law
(that's how one honors rule of law in the violation).
Do they have to meet both of your personal criterium to meet the definition of "civil disobedience"? I mean, to you, sure. But you consistently show a massive double standard with most issues of importance.
Quote:Not clear what "subjective opinion" refers to here.
Not to you, but thankfully that's not a bar the concept has to hurdle.
Quote:That people can subscribe to different but rationally constructed moral codes which clash may illustrate "dangers" of one sort or another, but I don't see that such differences/clashes are based on "subjective opinion" especially if the clash is over abortion.
Of course you don't.
Quote:I don't think abortion, as currently legal in the U.S., is murdering children so no, I wouldn't support efforts to criminalize abortions via civil disobedience or any other means.
The most important part of that sentence being the word "I". You clearly live in a bubble of what Dill believes and discount all other possibilities.
Quote:*Think of someone publicly burning a draft card and going to jail, as opposed to someone driving through a stop sign because no one was looking.
Yes, let's look at this fascinating analogy. One involves ignoring a law based on principle, and the other involves ignoring a traffic ordinance because "no one's looking". Honestly, it's like you're not even trying to have an honest debate. Please explain to us all how ignoring a stop sign is an example of civil disobedience.
