Redefining GOOD
response to someone's post Wrong feeling
Saddam was not put to death in retribution for the 'bombings in Iraq" or the "plans of al Qaeda." While his trial and execution may have been terribly flawed, he was convicted by an Iraqi court for crimes against humanity that occured within a country that he was in power of.
Unfortunate as it may seem to some GOOD ? ULTRA LIBERAL. Just b/c the guys who started the publication happen to have attended Brown and other so-called left wing (ed. note: soft) schools, and their content may occasionally reflect this, it does not necessarily mean that the magazine needs to espouse all of the ideals that they picked up in first year American Civilization seminar. I can't speak for the magazine itself (mostly b/c this is a magazine and blog that contains different ideas conceived by different people), but I would imagine that any GOOD guy/gal would tend to agree.
As for making fun of dead people, this is almost always unacceptable except in certain well defined circumstances.
Like this article? Tell the world It's Good!





not yet rated
Re: redefining GOOD
What I was arguing is that death penalty does not afford any additional "peaceful sleep" beyond a life sentence, and that making fun of a flawedly executed man does not seem "GOOD", seems rather revengeful and resentful.
I'm sorry, but not being american don't know what first year American Civilization ideals are...
Posted on January 7, 2007 — by someone
1 comment