From: John Cuccia 

And what kind of person argues, on the one hand, that morality differs from
century to century while also arguing, on the other,  that a Constitution
written some two and a quarter centuries ago should not be subject to
regular reinterpretation as a result of those ever-changing mores?

A hypocrite, that's what kind.


On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 12:06:57 -0500, "Gary Britt"
 wrote:

>Different time different morality.  1840 versus 1940.  Only the brain dead,
>biased or biased brain dead try to compare actions across centuries from a
>standard of morality that didn't exist until recently.
>
>Gary
>
>"Adam"  wrote in message
news:442bd534{at}w3....
>> John Cuccia wrote:
>> > On Thu, 30 Mar 2006 00:47:58 -0500, "Mark"
 wrote:
>> >
>> >> You're now saying you're against our actions in WWII John?
>> >
>> > What in the world is your addled little brain reading now?   I said
>> > nothing of the sort.
>> >
>> > I was commenting on the existence, or lack thereof, of the
"laws and
>> > customs of war", which are polite fictions which rarely
survive the
>> > savage exigencies of the moment.
>> >
>>
>> It should be pointed out that ethnic cleansing & even genocide were part
>> of the customs & within the law till 45 & then people were
prosecuted
>> for doing it to white people rather than darker skinned people under
>> wholly new & retroactive victor's justice.
>>
>> e.g. in your indian wars etc ethnic cleansing was the aim but coz they
>> weren't white it didn't matter.
>>
>> Adam
>>
>> >> > >> always wrong in your eyes, or what? I ask cause it sure
comes across
>that
>> >> way most of the time>
>> >
>> > Have you stopped beating your wife yet, or what?
>> >
>

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5