Ban All Individuals Who Have Used Violence to Further a Political Cause, From Standing for Election

I do not believe I necessarily deserve all of the thanks, if it had not been for you This debate never would have occured. Now I will immediatly jump into rebuttals. "please stare how violence has ever solved anything? " WW2, WW1, American Civil War, American Revolutionary War, Napoleonic Wars, etc. Nearly every war in the history of mankind has solved some sort of issue. Violence gets issues done quickly, and prevents them from expanding and blowing up. Of course there is loss of life, but if an issue builds pressure over time and erupts, then there will be a much greater loss of life, this is the inevitability of violence. "Yes, violence is open but is it good to see people dying or being hurt because of a political cause that a certain individual or group believe in? " It is never good for people to be seen getting injured and being killed. But for something worse I point to The issue over slavery before the American Civil War. Compromise was impossible, and rather than have a war without a massive loss of life problems built up because people believed they could quickly compromise. The American Civil War became one of the bloodiest, violent, and horrendous wars in U. S. history. "So far, ALL the examples you have used have been from ancient times/ the Middle Ages and we have now become a much more civilised people. " Really? We are not "civilized" we have simply found other ways of shedding blood. You may tell we are much more "civilized" to the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay, to people in third world countries who starve to death, to victims of rape, murder, and police brutality. People just lime to lie to themeselves and deny the nature of Humanity, we are beings who tend to be selfish, cruel, and malevolent. We are hust as bad as we were 500 to 5000 years ago, our methods of killing each other have simply evolved. "You cannot say violence is inevitable and we should let it happen because through this motion we set to PREVENT this violence so that these individuals will be put off and will be more likely to gain power through legal methods if they want a chance of standing for election" But violence is inevitable. People need to protect themeselves to avoid being killed. Lf course we should try to prevent violence from murderers, rapists etc. but the point is that violence, though not necessarily pleasant, is a valuable tool for furthering POLITICAL CAUSE, not for any individual lust or want. "This, I feel outweighs your points because you are just telling us to accept the status quo when I am actually providing a SOLUTION FOR IT. " There is no solution for inevitability. People will always use violence to further political ends, in the same way people shouldnt fear death because no matter what its coming for you. Im not telling anyone to accept the status quo either, i, telling people to know that violence is unsavory but so is politics. Violence hopefully will only last awhile, jnstead of slowly wearing down a society. "Also, could please care to prove to me how what Gerry Adams or Abraham Lincoln's violent actions can be justified and how they should have been allowed to continue being violent? You haven't responded to that point of rebuttal. " Gerry Adams allegations have not been completely proven yet. If he is a member of the IRA then in truth I can justify his actions to a degree. The british are hanging on to a small piece of a land they have primarily freed, they do not want to be part of this government and should take action. However, I cannot necessarily approve of the hse of violence in a situation as complicated as this. Keep in mind however, that during there time the founding fathers were also viewed as terrorists. I do support Lincolns use of violence. He preserved the upUnion, his war was for his nation and I can and will support him. Ho else do you think the mixing pot of so many issues that culminated in the American Civil War? There was no other alternative but the inevitability of war. Virginia held a peace conference, and the north was willing to compromise and gives concessions. In his own inagural adress lincoln stared that he would be willing to let the south keep its slaves but not spread.