No Ray you have missed the point...or more accurately dodged it. It is a
simple question. Was it ETHICAL what ELF did?
Your artful dodge of 'well the Scott's were damaging everbody's
environment so why is what ELF did wrong?' is just that a dodge. This
cuts both ways you know. Why is what the Scott's did wrong when the
people at ELF think it is okay to destroy private property?
Think about this. The Scott's were probably doing some damage to the
environment by building their dream house. However, were you terrified?
Did you lose sleep over it? Do you have nightmares about it (I mean the
real thing not some rhetorical BS, but waking up in the night crying or
screaming)? Was anyone else on the list terrified by what the Scott's
were doing? No. Nobody was. Don't try to tell me you were, because
prior to Jim's posting I doubt very seriously you even new there was a
Scott family living in the Bloomington Indiana area.
Now, are the Scotts afraid? Are they worried about their own safety and
well being? Yes. This is what makes the two acts incomparable. You're
almost seeming to endorse such thuggish behavior.
In other words, suppose you accidentally back into my car at a parking
lot...is it then ethical for me to break your arm?
Steve
Caps for emphasis.
--- Ray Lanier <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Steve,
>
> As usual, you just miss the point completely. May I suggest that you
> read
> *very carefully*, then *think* before you make comments such as below.
>
> Ray
> --------------
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, June 18, 2000 6:34 PM
> Subject: Re: ELF, ALF, EarthFirst! and terrorism
>
>
> > Well I guess I am not that surprised that nobody seems to want to
> analyze
> > the ethics of ELF or ALF. They terrorized a family, in much the same
> way
> > a home invasion would terrorize a neighborhood. So far the responses
> have
> > skirted this issue. Guess what Ray, your dwelling (just as John
> Foster's)
> > damages the environment. Was your house *always* there? Is it part
> of
> > the natural environment? Do you have electricity, running water,
> cable
> > television. Think of all that damage. I think the word we are
> looking
> > for here is hypocirsy.
> >
> > Frankly the responses have been pretty much of a singular nature.
> > Pathetic. Sure Vince Scott and his family may have not considered the
> > environmental impact of their dream home (or maybe they did, the
> article
> > does point out the mainstream environmentalist had little worries
> about
> > the development), but does that justify burning it down and scaring
> his
> > children? And that cryptic threat at the end of the story indicates
> that
> > these guys are nothing but thugs.
> >
> > > ...we are compelled to come back to the question of
> > > just
> > > what are the characteristics of an ethical, a moral, person.
> >
> > Well I guess a moral and ethical person can burn down another's house.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > =====
> > "In a nutshell, he [Steve] is 100% unadulterated evil. I do not
> believe in
> a
> > 'Satan', but this man is as close to 'the real McCoy' as they come."
> > --Jamey Lee West
> >
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Send instant messages with Yahoo! Messenger.
> > http://im.yahoo.com/
>
>
=====
"In a nutshell, he [Steve] is 100% unadulterated evil. I do not believe in a
'Satan', but this man is as close to 'the real McCoy' as they come."
--Jamey Lee West
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com/
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|