That (D)epends. Is the oath violator (R)eprehensible or (D)ifferent? Are they going against the Constitution in a (D)efensible, moral way, such as advocating for the murder of babies? Or are they violating the Constitution in a (R)epugnant way, suggesting that humans have a (R)ight to self-defense?
That (D)epends. Is the oath violator (R)eprehensible or (D)ifferent? Are they going against the Constitution in a (D)efensible, moral way, such as advocating for the murder of babies? Or are they violating the Constitution in a (R)epugnant way, suggesting that humans have a (R)ight to self-defense?
I see what you did there.