well,that takes us right back to where you and i disagree.
sometimes what is moral is not legal.
and are we really talking about morality? or justice?
these also are not the same and they are highly subjective.

the rule of law was the one thing i really found fascinating about this country in its early years.not so much the execution of said laws..but the idea of it.

i like the idea of it.
we can temper the law with our own sense of justice and morality,but not in its absolute form.

from a morality standpoint i dont think the US has a leg to stand on.
would you give any credence to ted bundy on a morality argument?
of course you wouldnt,and neither would i.
we would also not give an argument from him on the topic of justice any weight.

he would be removed from the conversation because his past actions dictated how any opinion he had was null and void.

so my dilemma has never been with YOU having moral outrage but rather from my government.
because past decisions have dictated that any opinion from a moral or justice standpoint should be viewed as false and insincere.

i share your moral outrage and anger at the injustice.

there has never been a war that has been a pure black and white dynamic.
but wars have always..and i mean always..fought over:land,resources and labor.
regardless of how it was implemented,be it religion or nationalism.

so.
you and i and our fellow citizens can be (and on average ARE) moral and just,but our government has lost its right to pontificate their right to engage in warfare on moral grounds.

if the international community gets together and decides on a course of action...fine.
the US government should not be the one to lead that charge though.
the hypocrisy would be too much to bear.

Huh... Never noticed that Al Bundy looks like Vladamir Putins older brother...

This, and the mention of Supermarket Sweep, inspired me to go looking for this:
http://videosift.com/video/Bundy-vs-Darcy-Shop-Off-Married-with-Children

Does this count as related?

Try Al Bundy's socks?

*asia

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Dutch, Al Bundy' to 'Dutch, Al Bundy, Ethan Embry, Ed ONeill' - edited by Boise_Lib

It's cool to know that Al Bundy could choke you out... I guess Peggy finally drove him to violence

Peg Bundy wants her outfit back.

That Star Trek:TOS clip wasn't a movie.

Al Bundy also said blah blah blah! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zOEtJBU2Pk

wow there are some strange celebrity choices in there...

bud bundy? kid actor from forest gump? norm? theo?

and how come huey lewis just used the paul mcartney vocals?

Locke was always my favorite character (until Benjamin Linus came along). He scores points for hooking up with Peggy Bundy, but if I were him I would have murdered my father after he stole my kidneys. So funny that Locke turns his father into a vegetable in dimension X. Sometimes Lost delivers the goods, but most of the time it doesn't. (Time for answers my ass -- all of my questions are centered around Hanso, the psychic children, and those Dharma bums. Fuck Jacob and fuck his homosexual brother.)

Kelly Bundy LIVES!!

[edit]

And Here's a parody of this song, which should have been a parody itself:

@rebuilder

I'm not trying to defend everything the guy says, but I think you're simplifying the nuance of his argument a little. He used the simplified example of chess to illustrate a point and then expanded it to another subject, female bodies, which he discussed in much greater detail. In real life, the example of chess would be expanded to include the option of not playing, or something like playing in a way that tries to prove a point to your opponent rather than just to win.

When he presents the argument about the Dalai Llama and Ted Bundy, I don't see how that could make you repulsed. How is it exactly that saying it's possible to be right or wrong about a moral choice naturally leads to genocide in your mind?

Moral decisions don't happen in a vacuum. They happen in a continuum of human existence. They happen in a factual situation. So, imagine your community is starving and you or a friend of yours makes the decision that to kill your/their child to serve the greater good by reducing the number of mouths to feed...or imagine someone who chooses cannibalism like in the movie "Alive". That might normally be considered morally wrong, but in a specific situation it could be considered understandable. Well, we all live in specific situations, and as a global community, that continuum of situations is constantly changing. The only way we can make proper moral judgments is to continually examine our situation and evolve our morals along with the course of human events. Even religions can change when presented with new information (Galileo, evolution), so doesn't that mean that information is affecting our morals? So, why not embrace and study that information which affects us so?

This video is proof that no one can out-Al-Bundy Al Bundy.