A recent wave of hoax bombs sent to offices of the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Services (the family courts in the United Kingdom, for those of us who aren't familiar with their tender ministrations), as well as some other organizations linked to the family court system, has raised the spectre of widespread violence by "father's rights" extremists. Hoax Bombs inundate CAFCASS

Wendy McElroy, an independent feminist (as opposed to radical feminist or gender feminist), seems to think that any use of violence in pursuit of political goals is immoral. Violence is the worst possible "strategy" for anyone who seeks social reform. It is not only immoral and illegal, it is also counter-productive to the cause being advocated. Is she right in principle? If so, what are we to make of the American Revolution, as well as the War Between the States, the Warsaw Uprising, etc?

Moving beyond the question of principle, what are we to make of this development? Assuming that there is no change in the family law system, will the nascent threat of "father's rights" violence fade, or will it surge as the less civilized youth of today come into conflict with the system in the future?

Is this the first, faint flickerings of Armaggedon? Is the "War Between the Sexes" going to go hot?

CLOSED.

There are too many questions here and none are clearly defined as the one we are to debate.

REOPENED.

Here are our questions to debate:

QUOTE

Is she [Wendy McElroy] right in principle, is the use of violence always immoral? If not, when would the use of violence be moral? Is the "father's rights" movement ever likely to meet such a standard of legitimate violence?

Enjoy the debate. Keep it civil.