4 ms·

I can't think of a worse idea than prosecuting Bush administration officials. Jailing the previous administration would set a terrible precedent, and would fata

I can't think of a worse idea than prosecuting Bush administration officials. Jailing the previous administration would set a terrible precedent, and would fatally undermine the stability of our government. There are many people who are convinced, e.g., that abortion is murder and that politicians who enable it ought to be prosecuted. Or, more on topic, that Diane Feinstein is a traitor for making these torture memos public. They believe this with as much moral certitude as anyone here believes torture is a crime. It is only a matter of time before another right-wing president is in the White House, and when there is I don't want there to be a precedent for jailing one's political rivals.

kansface 12y ago
Under your proposed system, no politicians of sufficient office would ever be tried for a crime related to their office (as long as it was for the right reason)? This seems like a very poor incentive system. I do agree with you that prosecution would not be good for stability. However, maintaining a separate rule of law for those in office is not good for stability, either.
mden 12y ago
So you are saying we shouldn't prosecute the executive branch even though they clearly broke and sanctioned breaking existing laws. When should we prosecute them? What makes them different from tyrants? Also your example doesn't make any sense. Creating a law for abortion is not even in the same category as breaking current laws. This is not purely an issue of morality, it's about the rule of law as well.
- kansface 12y ago
  I believe you mean prosecute.
  - mden 12y ago
    Yup, thanks!
bvanslyke 12y ago
You're erroneously comparing actual on-the-books illegal crime with crimes against belief systems. Hypothetically if enabling abortion or publicizing documents were illegal the way torture is, then those people ought to be jailed, too, if the law means anything. What shouldn't matter is someone's occupation or status. This should be obvious.

kansface 12y ago

Under your proposed system, no politicians of sufficient office would ever be tried for a crime related to their office (as long as it was for the right reason)? This seems like a very poor incentive system. I do agree with you that prosecution would not be good for stability. However, maintaining a separate rule of law for those in office is not good for stability, either.

mden 12y ago

So you are saying we shouldn't prosecute the executive branch even though they clearly broke and sanctioned breaking existing laws. When should we prosecute them? What makes them different from tyrants? Also your example doesn't make any sense. Creating a law for abortion is not even in the same category as breaking current laws. This is not purely an issue of morality, it's about the rule of law as well.

kansface 12y ago
I believe you mean prosecute.
- mden 12y ago
  Yup, thanks!

bvanslyke 12y ago

You're erroneously comparing actual on-the-books illegal crime with crimes against belief systems. Hypothetically if enabling abortion or publicizing documents were illegal the way torture is, then those people ought to be jailed, too, if the law means anything. What shouldn't matter is someone's occupation or status. This should be obvious.