The right to what???

[Dr.Rob]

I was watching "Amistad" on cable this weekend and was struck by something the spreme court says at the end of the film.

(I don't know if this is real or made up dialouge)

The Amistad africans were found to be free men, therefore enabled with god given rights, INCLUDING the right of free man to SEDITION. i'd SURE love to have a legal expert look that up and see if that's the case. (basically it said the revolt/mutiny by these "FREE MEN" was justified (since they were unjustly enslaved) and therefore by the right of sedition acted in self defense.

Granted this is pre-civil war and the courts might have re-adjusted such language in the face of reconstruction.. but I found the passage quite interesting.

Because , if we have as free men the RIGHT to sedition.. how the hell can free men exercise this right save through the use of arms?? (which is the whole POINT of the 2nd amendment)

Just food for thought,

Dr.Rob


PS this is really making me think Speilberg is on our side.

 

[George Hill]

Very good observation! I had the same thoughts myself the first time I saw it. Movie really made you think... about a great many things.

 

[Jack 99]

On a related issue, is Speilberg on our side?
I know he appeared on the cover of Gun Games and he made that movie with Sally Field and Keifer Sutherland (who makes a fantastic sicko bad guy, BTW) where Sally blew Keifer away with a .38 after he raped her daughter.

Other Speilberg films leave me wondering. How do you make a film like Schnindler's List without showing how the historic Schindler obtained guns for the the Jews at the end of the war to thwart a massacre by the guards?

Maybe he's confused on the issues. Maybe some of Rabbi Mermelstein's info needs to appear in his mailbox.........