Quote:
Originally posted by Atticus Grinch
What's your beef with the hypo? California can put you to death for holding up a liquor store where the clerk shoots your accomplice, because by committing the felony you've become responsible for the consequences --- even if you didn't know the clerk had a gun and knew your accomplice was a pussy at heart and wouldn't have pulled the trigger. You thought you would wind up with $400 bucks or so, and that's all you thought you were in for; the law makes you responsible for the other consequences.
I think your view of the fairness of that situation would be informative of your view of one's responsibility for the foreseeable consequences of one's vote. (I'll give you an exception for Newsom --- take credit for what you like.)
Your complaint is that the situations are not equivalent, not that they are not parallel.
|
Are you really in such a need to argue that it's come to this?
It's fair because of my act was malum en se and, although I may not have forseen the consequences, the consequences of my actions were reasonably forseeable.
I think your hypo suffers from a causation standpoint, among other reasons. If the CA system was in place at the federal level and I voted directly for a Constitutional amendment I may be able to agree with you.
I have said before I do not love Bush. But, like you, I'm not going to throw my vote away.
And, incidentally, I gladly voted for Newsom (a DEM for all of you out there) and even contributed to his campaign.
Threaded Mode