Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ubertuber
After all, who's in the position of determining which protests are legitimate. What if it was Exxon protesting Shell's market practices? Do THEY get a pass?
Some of you may blow this off because it looks obvious on the surface, but I'm not so sure that I see anything greater than a difference of degree.
|
ubertuber, I'm referring to the thread in general (and not your post) when I ask: Where is all the sympathy for these for-profit companies coming from? Now, I'm quite aware that Lucifer works on the ship, but I hardly think that Greenpeace is putting his job in jeopardy. Even so, I'd be happy to put him up should that ever happen, so no worries there.
Another fear we all might have is that if we say it's alright for Greenpeace, it's alright for terrorists. Whatever a "terrorist" is, I think that's a slippery slope argument.
We also might think that if it's alright for Greenpeace to do this, then it's alright for Exxon to do it. Well... I don't see it as a matter of degree. I see a clear line. As far as I know, Greenpeace exists to spread awareness and to educate on the state of the failing environment. Exxon exists to make money. I'd like to think that the forward thinking humanists here would throw their weight behind something in the pursuit of knowledge and saving our asses on this planet.