Skip to content

Chew on this one

Headed back to work shortly, but I thought this was worth sharing:

…I am well aware that it would be disingenuous to resolve indiscriminately the opposition of any set of men (merely because their situations might subject them to suspicion) into interested or ambitious views. Candor will oblige us to admit that even such men may be actuated by upright intentions; and it cannot be doubted that much of the opposition which has made its appearance, or may hereafter make its appearance, will spring from sources, blameless at least, if not respectable—the honest errors of minds led astray by preconceived jealousies and fears. So numerous indeed and so powerful are the causes which serve to give a false bias to the judgment, that we, upon many occasions, see wise and good men on the wrong as well as on the right side of questions of the first magnitude to society. This circumstance, if duly attended to, would furnish a lesson of moderation to those who are ever so much persuaded of their being in the right in any controversy. And a further reason for caution, in this respect, might be drawn from the reflection that we are not always sure that those who advocate the truth are influenced by purer principles than their antagonists. Ambition, avarice, personal animosity, party opposition, and many other motives not more laudable than these, are apt to operate as well upon those who support as those who oppose the right side of a question. Were there not even these inducements to moderation, nothing could be more ill-judged than that intolerant spirit which has, at all times, characterized political parties. For in politics, as in religion, it is equally absurd to aim at making proselytes by fire and sword. Heresies in either can rarely be cured by persecution.

50 points if you can identify the source.  Google if you must.  I’ll provide the source and a link tomorrow.

{ 2 } Comments

  1. Ken BuchananNo Gravatar | September 26, 2008 at 11:35 am | Permalink

    Cheese and Crackers!!! Fifty points? Tough nut… but I think I’ve cracked it. First, I read it. Then I read it again, and again, and again (using different voices in my head to come up with possible “right” answers) My first guess was A.L. (no, not Angela Lansbury! Abraham Lincoln) WC? (Winston Churchill… not Wilt Chamberlain) BC? (No… not the comic strip caveman! Bill Clinton.) BB? SP? (No… not Betty Boop/ or Sean Penn… Bob Barr/ or… no, definitely NOT Sarah Palin) Adolph Hitler? Abbey Hoffman? NO NO NOOOOOOO!!! Alexander Hamilton!!!!! I’m right… right? (Well… not “Right” right… “Correct” right. Like “right brained” right?) Fifty points Dude!
    (Yeah. I gave up and Googled after watching Stewart and Colbert to calm me down but, still… FIFTY POINTS!)
    Peace. -K.

  2. Ken BuchananNo Gravatar | September 26, 2008 at 12:05 pm | Permalink

    Uh… you’re not taking off points for spelling are you? If you are I’m back down to your usual measly offering of 2 points. (Interesting aside… Adolph Hitler was Linda’s first guess when I posed the question to her. Kind of creepy… in a “correct initials wrong dude” kind of way.)

Ratlands is using WP-Gravatar