LogFAQs > #955531939

zebatov posted...

The people can regulate themselves

I seriously doubt that: they're going to pass on self-interest in order to address a greater good? I don't see much evidence for that. Regardless, the word "regulated" in a constitution would heavily imply a government role in said regulation.

As for the definition, sure, it's a group of people that form a military force for...some reason. That is a broad enough definition to encompass more or less any group of people getting together with weapons.

As for the government and "terrorist", now you're touching on the absolutism that is ruining everything right now. Both right wingers and left wingers are guilty here. Yes, the government has problems that would meet the definition of some bad things: outright "terrorist" is a stretch, but whatever.

Point being: it took hundreds of years to build the government and traditions that we have. Do you see an alternative to our system that is something you would like to have? If not, it would be wise to focus your rhetoric on the portion of the government you believe is in need of reform. There are certainly options available.

I don't want to see a mob of people who were whipped up by incendiary - but limited - issues (abortion, guns, whatever from either the left or right viewpoints) break our entire system and destroy everything that DOES work without a plan for something better. But nobody appears to think any further than "I hate these issues: burn the whole thing down!" Life isn't that easy.

Of course, the reality is that the system is going to break on it's own under the weight of greed and partisanship unless there's another WWII or something to remind us why we need to get along.

---

Pronounced "Whup-pot". Say it. Use it.