[…] It is immoral to not resist aggression.
Whether in matters personal, political, religious or in statecraft, … it matters not, … to not resist aggression is to aid and abet the aggressor, and to assure that after your demise at his hands, he will seek the conquest of another. Whatever you may feel the worth of the stance to you as a personal matter, by adopting such a stance, you assure the suffering of another: no high blown assertion of morality can escape this essential fact, and to inflict this suffering on another, perhaps less capable of protecting him or herself than you, is immoral, unethical, and unforgivable.
And, it is cowardice. […]
Cowardice. The Leftinistra call that appeasment.
[…] He that suffers his life to be taken from him by one that hath no authority for that purpose, when he might preserve it by defense, incurs the Guilt of self murder since God hath enjoined him to seek the continuance of his life, and Nature itself teaches every creature to defend itself. […]
Protecting yourself, in this Nation we call the United States, requires that you do have some dignity.
[…] Is your life worth protecting? If so, whose responsibility is it to protect it? If you believe that it is the police’s, not only are you wrong - since the courts universally rule that they have no legal obligation to do so - but you face some difficult moral quandaries. How can you rightfully ask another human being to risk his life to protect yours, when you will assume no responsibility yourself? Because that is his job and we pay him to do it? Because your life is of incalculable value, but his is only worth the $30,000 salary we pay him? If you believe it reprehensible to possess the means and will to use lethal force to repel a criminal assault, how can you call upon another to do so for you? […]
The Snooper Report.
Join us as we Take Our Country Back.
Sic vis pacem para bellum