>>if one were to follow your line of argument so far...and buy into it...then the only options would apparently be apathy, despondency...and/or sedition?<<

Please explain how acknowledgment of reality necessitates lethargy or despair? I can *almost* wrap my head around what you connote by sedition (though I am probably mistaken) - er, that is, actually, I have no idea what you mean by 'sedition' in this context.

Simply put: there is no historical support for your implication that the USA or its courts have been, in the past, more ethical or egalitarian in the past than they are today, and quite a preponderance of evidence to suggest that, in fact, they have (naturally) swung back and forth, depending on issue and context.

You, perhaps, wanted affirmation for your outrage, instead of historical criticism. Very good. You have it. I mean to point out that it is not any sort of 'ad fontes' return to some magical golden age of US justice that is at stake, however, but a breakthrough into becoming, in reality, what you describe.

Sane acceptance of the reality and the history of ethical / moral failures of this nation is not a death blow to progress. Quite the opposite. Argue that USA was, in fact, a bastion for justice and humanity at some point - show me how I'm wrong with something other than anecdote or description of personal emotions, and you'll be getting somewhere.

Or, you could complain to the mod, and have that disturbing seditious voice silenced! Thus championing your deeply held belief in freedom, humanity, and ...? what was it again?

I don't think an appeal to logic is your best tactic, in this case, eh T¿ Unless you're prepared to demonstrate the logic by which you assume the above¿ Strangely, I don't find the binary "balck & white" you mention in *my* argument, but rather in the one *you* imply, that somehow the US was once a standard of great ideals, but is no longer.

The reality - as I see it - is that the US has become steadily more and more committed to ethical justice and human rights - with some notable dips in the graph, granted - over the course of its history. We've lapsed in recent decades, but this is historically normal and to be expected. By what logic do you claim my argument is otherwise aligned? Where is my absolute?

It is *you* growling seditiously, hippie, and me defending the true character of this grand political experiment.