hi clo,
requires sense more than courage.
the idea that reasonable protection of people (including children) modifies the desire for freedom is blindingly obvious. it just seems to take a bloody great whack to get people to see it.
it is a very strange thing to see people so intransigent about their principles without recognising that others are also important.
where does the intransigence come from?
i think people derive it from the sense of many people that the constitution describes inviolable truths. we have this right and it may not be abridged!
piffle.
protection of children from violent video-game-playing madmen with guns isn't in there. but it ranks higher with any reasonable person than the freedom to carry an assault weapon into a school.
even justice scalia knows this.
the people that don't are simply incapable of thinking and need to be marginalised. their opinions are not worth listening to.
| 