3 ms·
Wouldn't that result in zero change? We'd still have segregation or slavery, no women voting, etc.
by mysterydip 2y ago
Wouldn't that result in zero change? We'd still have segregation or slavery, no women voting, etc.
- bilbo0s 2y agoMeh, even with change, in the future, we may still have segregation, or slavery, or no women voting. (Most probably, all three.) Change, simply "is". It's not "good" or "bad" in and of itself. We shouldn't be using it as the basis of an argument for or against some particular thing. We should, instead, argue the specific merits of that particular thing. Killing people for thought crime is "bad", in my opinion, because the person may not have intended to commit any crime. He might have said, "John should not have torn pages from the quran." And at the same time had no intention of an angry mob descending on John's home to burn John and his family to death. But for a lot of crimes, in the legal codes of many places, it's not necessary to prove "intent".