Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MuadDib
I know it isn't relevant for the sake of this discussion, but in Exorcist: The Beginning, the priest doesn't actually shoot anyone. The Nazi makes him choose the ones that the soldier will kill or else he will just wantonly shoot away.
|
Yes, but that doesn't illustrate my point in the least. Call it creative reinterpretation for the sake of illustration.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MuadDib
What is relevant is the underlying message throughout the movie. That the priest did not, in fact, become party to the Nazis evil because of his compromise but suffered because he let that compromise strip him of his faith.
|
And why was his faith compromised? Two reasons:
1) Anger that god would allow such a thing and
2) Anger at himself for participating.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MuadDib
Actually, it was his very rigid ideology (i.e., A good God wouldn't allow this kind of evil to exist) that caused him to lose faith and led to suffering. The idea that a 'presidential' individual doesn't compromise with the enemies is ludicrous.
|
A compromise in which freedoms provided in the Bill of Rights are lost is not something a good leader or even a good person would be willing to do. The idea that somehow it's okay because he got to add his asterisk is ludicrous. His name appears on a document that allows abuse of power. It's not more complex than that.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MuadDib
First it begs the question, how are these enemies and what defines them as such? Second, the idea that these enemies are completely & entirely wrong/at-fault is egocentric nonsense. There is always room to compromise, even with our enemies. Certainly there are individual issues that shouldn't be compromised, but people/nations are not simply issue-vessels and there is always room to compromise with them.
|
I'm not making vague references, though. The document in full is available online. In 2003, Barak Obama specifically said that he would support a repeal of the Patriot Act, and then in 2006 he voted to extend it because they allowed him to make very minor changes. The document he signed still takes away liberties.
Look at how he's formulated strategies about other things, such as Iraq, and you see a man unwilling to compromise his values and the safety and rights of the people. He supports withdrawal from Iraq, which is not a compromise at all, but in fact is a move that is beneficial to all Americans (except a few dozen really rich ones) and that is not a compromise with the madmen that would continue the war indefinitely. That's the kind of leadership it takes to be president, and putting his Iraq policy next to his Patriot Act policy shows one thing: inconsistency.