Question for Red Rover

Red Rover left the following comment in my comments section:

“…justice is simply “I don’t like it” applied by a person or group of persons with adequate power to punish those who step out of line…”

This leads to an interesting question:

Sir, what is your opinion of chivalry?

That is, what is your opinion of the moral imperative to treat even avowed enemies with courtesy and dignity on the grounds each human foe, being human, merits it, regardless of one’s personal preferences or disposition toward him, or enmity or grievance?

In particular, should I be polite to you and allow you to make false, nonsensical and evil statements here on my platform, when I have the power to ban you without explanation and without any fear of retaliation?

Or should I extend courtesy to you and allow you the time and space to speak your piece?

Please think carefully before responding, and please respond promptly, since, if I hear no answer, I may ban you merely as the type of exercise in arbitrary power which you seem here to be advocating.


Well, well, Mr. Rover aka Steelman aka JackRippa reacted as predicted.

“There is no objective chivalry any more than there is any objective justice.”

Wrong answer. Banned.

Am I a fool? Am I going to treat you fairly if you say there is no such thing as fairness? Am I going to be just to you if you say justice is merely the will of the stronger? Am I to be chivalrous if you spit on chivalry?

You have been banned under different names here twice before. You should know by now that your own philosophy condemns you.

Instead, I will do you the honor of assuming you want to be treated according to the standard you announce.