Well, political assassinations......would Cuba and Cubans be better off should Castro have been assassinated or if the Bay of Pigs had actually been successful?

I suppose it all comes down to whether it is acceptable to use that which is immoral to attempt to move toward that which is more moral. Age old argument of end justifying the means. And, as the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand (didn't even need to read your links, GD, as that is certainly what touched off WWI and what I assume you are referring to) demonstrates, the outcome is not always what you viewed the outcome would be.

Julius Ceasar would be another such example. I picture Marc Anthony's speech - "But he was an ambitious man!" spoken sarcastically to incite the crowd.

Better the devil you know, I suppose. But I will add that there comes a point at which the assassination of someone may actually become the moral thing to do. If Pol Pot had been assassinated, would that have been immoral? Subtitute your favorite despot or dictator for Pol Pot.

If, by the convenience remark you are referring to my post, I don't make a living off of my religion, and I don't have any influence over any segment of the population. (I can't even get my animals to stay off the furniture). I also do not go around proclaiming my superiority due to the religion I belong to, and I don't recall having said anything about never making mistakes or 'sinning', as it were. Pat Robertson is a visible figure in the religous political arena, and if he is going to put this sort of crap out there, I think he is fair game and should be accountable for his actions and statements.

As far as government sanctioned assassinations, is it really any different than assassinations in general? Would the same person that espoused the murder of Idi Amin think that Abe Lincoln's murder was justified? It's all about perspective, I suppose.

LOL- your post inspired mine, but was not a personal indictment (love the animal comment) and I sure don't disagree that he is fair game....I was just thinking that you could put pretty much any group in your post- and it would be true-
I don't know enough about the ins and outs of assassinations- that is why I will certainly leave those debates to others.

Fair enough, Nephytys! It's true that just about any group could be defined as such. Must come with being human.

It seems Pat is denying calling for an assassination: I didn't say that! , however, the article points out that he did indeed say that during the broadcast. Further, he blames the media for all the negative attention. What a weasel- if you're going to go out on a limb and say something that you truly believe, at least have the courage to stick to your guns. Claiming you didn't say what you really did say, especially when it's being recorded, is just idiotic.

I particularly like the idea that it's so much better that he's just advocating kidnapping. Murder would be bad but kidnapping? Hey! That's just great!

Here's my moral relativism of the day:
Of course it would be naive to think that such things (murder, kidnapping, etc) were not sponsored by the various governments of the world. They do happen. And in some cases, hindsight allows us the benefit of marking them as "good." Or at least "better than the alternative."

But it's one thing to know the such things happen, and it's quite another for a very public figure in a very public forum to go around advocating for such actions.

No, in the end it doesn't matter whether it was talked about first or just done. It doesn't make "taking out" any more moral if we don't talk about it. But when public figures shift from being uncomfortable with discussing the subject in public to outright advocation I think that does say something about our society. It's one thing to do an "evil" deed reluctantly. It's quite another to do it enthusiastically.

Well, it seems he has decided to own up and apologise . Fair enough- it seems reasonably delivered and he doesn't try to reduce it with excuses too much. I still despise him, but I think he finally got around to doing the right thing, whatever his motives.

I can accept that. I say things out of frustration on occassion, and he does not try to blame anyone else. Now about the rest of the list of quotes that MBC posted....

:eek:

See what I miss when I take off to DC!!!!

Anyway, Robertson? Is anybody really surprised at what he said?

Really?

;) The guy's a nut.

I'm kinda amused at all the media attention he's getting.

Oh, and Wendybeth? Kidnapping is still A-OK ! Don't you feel better?

Lol, Scrooge! Frankly, I'm surprised he hasn't expressed a desire to kidnap those troublesome Communist Feminist Lesbians he speaks of so often. They're destroying our country, don't you know.....:rolleyes:

Give him time. I expect him to get much more entertaining as he slips further into old age.

He's the gift that just keeps giving.