http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/cleared-jury-decides-that-threat-of-global-warming-justifies-breaking-the-law-925561.html

Quote

...
In a verdict that will have shocked ministers and energy companies the jury at Maidstone Crown Court cleared six Greenpeace activists of criminal damage.

Jurors accepted defence arguments that the six had a "lawful excuse" to damage property at Kingsnorth power station in Kent to prevent even greater damage caused by climate change. The defence of "lawful excuse" under the Criminal Damage Act 1971 allows damage to be caused to property to prevent even greater damage – such as breaking down the door of a burning house to tackle a fire.
...

Wow... so now it is ok (in the UK) to destroy property at a power station due to global warming and the "lawful excuse" law...

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-c
> hange/cleared-jury-decides-that-threat-of-global-w
> arming-justifies-breaking-the-law-925561.html
>
>
> ...
> In a verdict that will have shocked ministers and
> energy companies the jury at Maidstone Crown Court
> cleared six Greenpeace activists of criminal
> damage.
>
> Jurors accepted defence arguments that the six had
> a "lawful excuse" to damage property at Kingsnorth
> power station in Kent to prevent even greater
> damage caused by climate change. The defence of
> "lawful excuse" under the Criminal Damage Act 1971
> allows damage to be caused to property to prevent
> even greater damage – such as breaking down the
> door of a burning house to tackle a fire.
> ...
>
>
> Wow... so now it is ok (in the UK) to destroy
> property at a power station due to global warming
> and the "lawful excuse" law...


Almost as bad as being forced to bear the child of a rapist (incest or not).

Huh?

Not even sure how that equates.

both are some of the stupidest ideas we've heard in a long time. Get it now?

First off, I don't have a bone in the abortion race (being a male). I can have a personal opinion on it, but personally, I don't think anyone involved in creating any legislation, or making any legal decision on something regarding abortion should be anyone but a woman.

I was talking about global warming - and a fairly ridiculous decision based on a legal ruling in the UK (what is up with that?).

So Vince - is this something you actually agree with me on, that the decision regarding that was stupid? I kind of got that from your attempt to explain the relevance of the first response.

People have the right..and sometimes the duty to participate in non-violent demonstrations. People have the right to protect their own life and property...depending on circumstances sometimes violently.

No one..not even other women...have the right to interfere in the decision making process between a person and his/her doctor on personal life and death decisions a person and sometimes family have to make on behalf of loved ones.
Plainly said...reproductive privacy and right to die decisions of an adult are no ones business but their own. The addition of the word "adult" is an important one. There are times when parents play an undue influence over a child...best example are christian scientists who deny medical attention to a minor based on their religious beliefs. I do believe that after due process of the courts society has the right to intervene on behalf of the child. I do not believe this right of society extends into a women's womb prior to when a fetus could survive outside the womb without artificial support.

Im sure that's more then anyone wanted to know!

Seems like the brits have really bought into the "sky is falling" mania surrounding the "man made global warming" myth.

Why is it that once people buy into a myth or a distorted version of reality, all reason goes out the door?

Oh, yeah, because they lacked the logic and reason in the first place in order to buy into it in the first place.

Bob.

Most people are stupid.

I don't think its so much that most people are stupid. I think people prioritize what they pay attention to. The news folks know this, which is why we have "sound bites". Over and over again the media will use the sound bites in repetition, to the point where folks who are not really paying attention will have only heard the message in the sound bites.

It's when you look behind the veil of the issues that you start finding the real truth, but right now the majority of the media is playing to the current liberal fear mongering. Both sides use fear in some respect, I guess it just gets down to what you fear the most - radical terrorists who have proven they are willing to blow folks up to make a point, or a "consensus theory" by a group of scientists and others that man is the largest culprit in global warming. Don't get me wrong, there has definitely been climate change, but with the lack of sunspots recently I am guessing we are going to find out in the next few years whether it is going to be a warmer climate, or a colder one.

RV..this is the most intelligent thing Ive seen you write on here yet! It actually had a sense of bi-partisanship..though you did over play "liberal fear mongering". Im proud of you!

As far as the greater "fear"...global warming vs terrorism. WHy cant we all agree those are the 2 greatest challenges facing all of us and go from there?

The problem from there is to dive into the details. Is a conventional war in Iraq and Iran..and wherever else the way we are going to win the war on terrorism? And on global warming...who the heck cares if man is the cause..the issue is...can man be the solution?

From Your favorite liberal...