You will forgive me but this is some pretty two, nay, one-dimensional thinking on your part.

Dred Scot was a Supreme Court decision and as such the law of the land, no? Do you personally believe in the principals contained within that decision? If not then why do you do not believe in those principals? It was a lawful decision on the part of the Supreme Court so why is that decision not the law of the land today? Because good people stood up and vociferously protested the vile, immoral, and reactionary foundation upon which that decision was based. That is no different than the situation we have here today of good people vociferously protesting what they believe are routine examples of harassment and widespread instances of illegal search and seizure.

Your statement that you feel that people who voice their concerns over what they see as violations of the Constitution as being un-American would have garnered you a failing grade at the elementary school I attended some twenty-two years ago, let alone a U.S. History 101 college class. In fact it was the primary call by the Founding Fathers to all citizens that it was their duty as citizens to question every decision the government makes.

Let us just hope that it takes far less time to correct the path we are now on than the 12 years that it took for the Fourteenth Amendment to be ratified thus overturning Dred Scott.




[This message has been edited by anrkitec (edited 01-16-2003).]