A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

Do The Ends Justify The Means?

You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “Do The Ends Justify The Means?”.

7 comments to Do The Ends Justify The Means?

  • John Powell

    Stand up and cheer – people are being hurt right now, and this help that they need.

  • halincoh

    Excellent post, Evan. I have for a very long time hated this form of game playing by our law makers. It is indeed a conundrum. As always, life comes in shades of gray and, as always, games are played between the margins. That said, to me, the ends SOMETIMES justify the means, but everything would have to be carefully placed on my moral balance before my deciding on the ENDS alone. I like to think I prefer all options on the straight and narrow before resorting to pulling rabbits from hats or shoving tag a long bills onto a more passable one.

  • Onoratoni

    I would support both. Protesting the way THIS bill is being passed will only hurt the bill in the long run. I think you must protest the practice of passing bills using the “Hitch Hike” technique. You would also be able to support the bill and what it stand for.

  • petrucio

    I’m completely against this type of piggy backing of laws. It’s the same system that brought the stupid Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act into the SAFE Port Act, and I do agree with the opponents of this bill, regardless of it’s contents.

    Any piece of legislation should come into being through proper ways. We as skeptics value intellectual honesty so much – and this could be easily described as democratic dishonesty, and should not be condoned.

  • I admire your principled stand. I’m in complete agreement Evan; however, the conundrum we find ourselves in is that the game seems to necessitate such tactics. The partisan state of affairs dictates that party interests trump the people’s interests. A bill, regardless of merit, is bitterly contested by the opposing party simply based on the belief that a victory for “them” (D or R) is a loss for “us” (D or R), even if it is in the best interest of everyone’s constituents. In such a system, principled people will never prosper. In the here and now, corporate interests supersede the people’s interests. Do we stand aside and let unprincipled legislators push the corporate agenda at the cost of the people? Anyways, principles do not seem to matter – is this a time to lay down?

  • eean

    Do you really think the framers didn’t intend for this sort of thing? Have you done a study of 18th century House of Commons and the various legislatures of the America colonies?

    I haven’t, but I would assume such legislative intrigues date straight back to the Roman Republic and are just a normal part of how laws have always been created.

  • […] Serfdom: Text and Documents–The Definitive Edition (The Collected Works of F. A. Hayek) (Volume 2) F.A. Hayek explains in The Road to Serfdom in a chapter entitled "Why the Worst Get on Road to Serfdom in a chapter entitled "Why the Worst Get on Top," those who seek power and dominion […]

Leave a Reply