Now... I don't much like the pledge of allegiance. I didn't think about it much earlier in life, but my wife (Mrs. Delusional to you.. or Mrs. D for short) has always refused to say it. She made a great point about it with me and I now believe it to be true.
To blindly pledge allegiance is unpatriotic. It assumes that the United States Government can do no wrong and I will unquestioningly agree with it.
Since I believe it is my duty to question the US Government and its intentions as a proper citizen of this free country... I now refuse the pledge on principal as well. It has nothing to do with all this "under God" nonsense...
However... There is a great line in it. ... With Liberty and Justice For All. That is something I can get behind. Justice For ALL! I like it.
By Justice for ALL... that means everyone, not just those which are American citizens but also those who are being held as terrorists. We believe in "Justice For ALL" as a ideal and unoppressive way to run our Government. Sometimes Justice For ALL involves some dangerous people being set free by us being absolutely sure we got the right person. Our country is founded on the principal that it is better to set the guilty free, than to imprison the innocent.
Our current President and his Thugs have scared us into believing we are safer to let them imprison these "bad guys" than to give them a fair trial under due process of the law.
I disagree. If they are truly guilty, let us try them for their crimes in a free and open court. Not some Military tribunal which is stacked against them, or have them held without habeas corpus for indefinite periods of time. This doesn't make me feel safer, it simply lulls us into a state of false security.
Try these people in the light of day, prove them guilty.
Then we can truly have Justice for ALL!
Wednesday, June 16, 2004
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I presume here that you are speaking of the detainees at Guantanamo. Now, if you are refering to any American citizens being held without charge or trial, I am on your side and you can ignore the rest of my comments. But... if you are refering to Guantanamo, read on.
We need to distinguish between "justice" and "rights". Justice is the principle of moral rightness. What you are advocating is the extension of the rights of American citizenship to non-citizens. Beyond that, one is not afforded rights without also assuming obligations. Most important among these obligations (especially in this situation) is the obligation to live by the laws of the society that provides your rights. How many of the detainees do you suppose would agree to that? Also, if one right is granted non-citizens aren't all non-citizens then entitled to all other rights as well? If so, then the anyone (whether living within our borders or not) would have claim to welfare benefits, access to civil courts, etc., etc. Do you think this is a workable concept?
I speaking as to the rights of those whom are American Citizens being held in Guantanamo Bay.
AND those who were in the United States under valid visas who are citizens of other countries with whom we would like to see fair treatment of our citizens under their laws.
Those captured as prisioners of war actually in the war in Afghanistan or Iraq should be properly tried in a military tribunal.
I am of the mind that it is better to err on the side of Justice than to make a Rush to Judgement!
Post a Comment