My comment here is to point out that it isn’t rocket science to see clearly which people are on the lawful, moral, side, and which people are – by their actions, if not their words – on the unlawful, immoral, side, and that having a badge, license, shield, title, position, or seat in office of government does not change the facts that matter when people clearly choose to step from moral behavior and to step clearly into immoral behavior.

It is not difficult when reason prevails.

Is it, for example, reasonable to acknowledge the fact that the Golden Rule (Mathew: 7:12) clearly provides the founding principle that supports morality and law?

Do unto other’s what you would have other’s do to you.

The opposite is clearly opposite of the above, even if you don’t acknowledge that the above is the founding principle that supports morality and law.

Do unto other’s what you would defend against having other’s do to you. I am special, I get to do to other people what other people had better not do to me.

Take any case, any situation, and see which side of the opposite sides people choose to be on, and apply the opposing RULES.

If you want to take from everyone everything they have, including the air they breath, then clearly you are not on the Golden Rule side, even if you think you are on the moral, right, lawful, side. If you were, then you would want other people to take everything from you, even the air you breath, so with that in mind, I think it is useful to think clearly about the current examples of behavior that are flooding the NEWS MEDIA as 2020 moves into the heat of summer. I can also state that the law is based upon the Golden Rule, so those who think otherwise may be confused about the law.