[Professor S]

Originally Posted by TheSlyMoogle

This is what garnered the "WOW" you just hadn't said it.

too tired to really coherently type it out but laws are constantly bent an broken, and the fact that they are is constantly ignored depending on the law. There are lots of laws that are now completely ignored (I.E. did you know oral sex is illegal in like 15 states even in the privacy of your own home? I mean technically police could bust you up for doing it, but you don't ever see that happen).

Just because laws exist it doesn't mean you should follow them blindly because they exist. That's ignorant. If history has taught use anything sometimes the best way to change the law is to treat it as though it doesn't exist.

For the record, I never justified the fact that some laws are enforced more than others. There are lots of blue laws that SHOULD be eliminated instead of ignored. Ignoring any law creates a precedent that any law can and will be ignored or selectively enforced. Selective enforcement is oppressive and unjust, and making is a moral sin as well as legal sin.

Reading your response though, you feel some laws just shouldn't be respected. Well then who gets to make the decision on what laws should be enforced, and what laws shouldn't? What reasoning are they using when deciding what laws should be enforced? How much money is involved? How much power can be transferred through such arbitrary decision making? These ideas you're expressing are dangerous.

This guy with no record of child abuse and no further evidence of Kiddie porn got a raw deal because he enjoy looking at naked anime children. He lost a year of his life over something as silly as that. Hell maybe the cartoons were the only thing keeping him from actually molesting a kid, and when he gets released from prison he'll actually do it.

What if the guy had thousands of files of this? What if he was distributing, illegally, and this was a way to shut him down? There is a lot we do not know. This is reason why there are laws and the expectation of equal treatment under them. This removes the emotional/sympathetic aspect. All we do know is that he broke the law, and admitted to doing so. Therefore: he should face the penalties demanded by that law.

P.S. Fuck the Establishment. It should be torn down and rebuilt from the ground up.

Ok, now I think I understand you a whole lot better. If you destroy the establishment, which includes a democratically elected republic, who gets to rebuild it and what system should we adopt? See, its a lot easier to say "fuck the world" than it is to think rationally and work positively to address flaws.

There is no way to remove the human factor from the systemic governing of a society. Destroy the establishment if you like, but what establishment will take its place, and who will be making the decisions, and in what way will they be chosen? Justice is not devoid of corruption, because humans enforce justice and humans are corrupt. When any decision is made about determining how people should be treated by a government, we always need to ask: "By whose standard?"

This is why laws MUST be clear and enforced if they are remain valid and civilization is to progress. You cannot measure you personal activity against a constantly changing yard stick. To make enforcement contingent on someone's feelings and empathy is to be oppressed by that person.