Comment: I appreciate your willingness

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I'm open to a civil debate (see in situ)

I appreciate your willingness

I appreciate your willingness to discuss, awl19. My apologies for the delay in replying.

I am of a different view. You blame the person who hires the hitman; I blame the hitman.

If the hitman were not willing to commit the act, I think few who would hire him to commit it would actually carry out the act on their own.

Thus, I think the ultimate sin is the actual commission of the act. Absent the commission of the act, we are dealing strictly in pre-crime; the thought of crime.

And we all know how tenuous that is.

That is my view. All are guilty; but specifically, for me, words are incredibly important. Obama is not a murderer; and he hasn't killed anyone. Literally. That is true.

If we fail to agree on that, we obfuscate the reality, and pardon those who are committing the act. They are free to continue murdering. That much is self-evident in the fact that "Obama's murders" continue to pile up.

Thus, my argument is that we should apply the adjective accurately, and in so doing, we would stigmatize the act and discourage others from undertaking it in the future. If we fail to do so, and instead attribute the 'murders' solely to the King, we are insulating and pardoning -- or, in effect, subsidizing -- the act, and will see more of it.

In perpetuity.