Yes, I am supportive of peaceful protests in places that can’t be easily ignored, in places that disrupt businesses and make people late for work.
The question I always find myself asking is, when it’s my turn to protest, if I feel so strongly about something that I literally take to the streets in protest, do I want to be in some out of the way “designated discontent zone” or would I want people to be forced to pay attention to me?
And if it’s bad enough that people are willingly being arrested to highlight it, why are we still ignoring their problems?
So yes, it’s morally correct to protest for things you believe in, especially when it makes the people in power upset.
Yes, I am supportive of peaceful protests in places that can’t be easily ignored, in places that disrupt businesses and make people late for work.
The question I always find myself asking is, when it’s my turn to protest, if I feel so strongly about something that I literally take to the streets in protest, do I want to be in some out of the way “designated discontent zone” or would I want people to be forced to pay attention to me?
And if it’s bad enough that people are willingly being arrested to highlight it, why are we still ignoring their problems?
So yes, it’s morally correct to protest for things you believe in, especially when it makes the people in power upset.
I never said he wasn’t a great guy or correct or that I’m not supportive.
Civil disobedience has consequences and this thread seems to not understand that concept.
Had this been a Republican, the tone of these comments would be quite different.