Reply #37: Your title asks a great question

[creeksneakers2]

Victims and perpetrators shouldn't be equally blamed. Is an abused spouse who stays in marriage for the kids and because she has nowhere else to turn as guilty as a wife beater? The perpetrator is the one who is wrong. Some victims fight back more than others, but most do what they can to save themselves and leave justice to the authorities.

A party that lied us into war is far more guilty than one which was too afraid to speak up about it.

Our discussions here tend to put idealism up against pragmatism. A balance is much better than either by itself. It makes no sense to keep getting elected if all progress is sacrificed in the bargain. It makes no sense to blow everything on one heroic standoff that leaves the enemy in charge of everything thereafter.

Solutions that don't accomplish anything and in the end actually make things worse are not moral, no matter how righteous they sound. A man is dying of a heart attack and the only doctor around has his license suspended. Is it right for the doctor to refuse to help?

The best way to accomplish all the aims of the left is to get the GOP kicked out of office at the ballot box. The moral perfectionists among us rank getting elected as least important. What would be the result?