I just think that for the betterment of society and stopping things that are immoral I'm doing a pretty good deed.
I just think that for the betterment of society and stopping things that are immoral I'm doing a pretty good deed.
Timothy McVeigh is too much of an extreme example. I'm talking more about in the vein of Al Sharpton or Michael Moore.
They have high priced attorneys. If you are set on a path of sticking your nose into places where it isn't going to be appreciated, then you need to similary get yourself one or more attorneys prepared to defend your actions, and stop with the pointless "what ifs". When you actually do something stupid and overstep your bounds and actually GET arrested, THEN come back and we'll be happy to evaluate the situation based on ACTUAL events. Until then, this line of questioning is really pointless.
Your thread title made me LOL. To answer your question, yes, you can force people to stop doing things you don't like. Be prepared for the consequences of trampling on someone's unalienable rights, however. I guess you never do or say anything that others might find offensive or undesirable? Tolerance is a virtue.
I find many things "immoral" that are perfectly legal. So, whose definition of "immoral" would you suggest we use to decide what should be permitted and what should not?
If you feel that something is wrong, you can agitate (peacefully and lawfully) against it. But, no law gives you or anyone the right to shut a speech or an event down simply because you disagree.
- - - Updated - - -
Oh, much of the time I'd like to stop them, too!
Oh ... uh ... or are you saying that their activities are what you'd like to emulate?
How stupid are you?
Sure, next time you see Michael Moore or Al Sharpton, you be sure to go into full-scale attack mode. Charge at them, make them fear for their lives. And then the rest of us will get to see what their bodyguards do you to on the evening news. if you survive, we'll also learn about the criminal charges you're facing.
There is the problem with your original thought, what is or isn't moral is a very personal thing. What if you feel it's immoral for unmarried people to live together? Many people do and many people don't. Do you feel it's immoral for a mother of a 16yr old daughter to wear skimpy outfits in public, or let her daughter wear skimpy outfits in public? What about people who don't attend church, attend the wrong church, have children out of wedlock, listen to the wrong music, dance with their bodies touching, eat veal, hunt, etc etc?
Who gets to draw the line on morals? I certainly don't want one person to decide what is right and moral for all of us, that's why we have laws that try to emulate the general feeling of the population with regards to what is right and wrong but even that is not going to be perfect for everyone.