About this site

  • Comments
    When you submit a comment, it won't be published until approved. This is to cut down on comment spam. However, I will also edit or block comments that are profane or offensive.
  • No Legal Advice
    Although I may from time to time discuss legal issues on this blog, nothing that I post should be construed as legal advice, nor as creating an attorney-client relationship between you and me. In fact, there's a good chance I'm not licensed to practice law wherever you are. If you need legal advice, you should consult an attorney licensed in your jurisdiction.
  • Personal View
    This blog is neither affiliated with my employer nor hosted by it. It is maintained through TypePad, and I pay the hosting fees. Nothing that is posted here should be construed as anything other than the views of the particular author of the post.
  • Tung Yin's Recent Papers (SSRN)

April 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30      


  • Check Google Page Rank

« Looking for info on ABC's "Alias"? | Main | "The Apprentice" and the Prisoner's Dilemma »

September 30, 2005



I also attended the talk and thought it was interesting. I'm not that acquainted with the theory of pacifism, how it's actually supposed to work. So what follows are simply first impressions rather than a solidified position.

The Saudi Jihadist story reminded me of Luke 4 (my background is similar to Mr Casteel's) when Jesus is tempted by Satan for forty days in the desert. Satan quotes from Psalms in trying to get Jesus to throw himself off the temple. What Jesus doesn't do is say, "Yes, you're right. Your interpretation of that passage is right and therefore I must do what it says." Instead he counters with a different passage. Of course, Jesus had slightly more knowledge about the correct interpretation than Mr Casteel. Still, when someone who wants to beat me up tells me that I'm obligated turn the other cheek, I'm going to ponder whether turning the cheek is something I'm obligated to do under every circumstance or if there are other, competing obligations that I have. What I'm saying is that rather than precipitate a moment of pacifist clarity, the Saudi's statement would have had the opposite effect of making me question whether pacifism is a viable answer to all uses of force or only a subset.

Conscientious objection would seem more conscientious to me if it was more closely tied to just war theory, less so to a pacifism that has to oppose involvement in all wars.

D. Henry Patterson

I went to High School with Josh. It's funn - Josh and I had many heated discusions regarding faith and politics. We never saw eye-to-eye, yet held a mutual respect for each other.

What a fascinating discussion regarding his recent talks. I produce a podcast called the Creepy Sleepy Show. On the podcast, we've interviewed Senators, musicians and a host of activists. None match the intensity of two Iraq vets we recently had on the show. They echoed similar sentiments I've found here. Thanks for the interesting discussion. I'm glad to know that Josh is doing well.



I couldn't have put it better myself. Comming from Clownshoe's (Casteel) same background... My retort to this ridiculous story of an incompetent interrogator would have had a bit more anger, and less clarity. thanks for you're wonderful insight, and knowledge on the subject.


The comments to this entry are closed.