I guess I don't understand what people who object to this outcome are supposed to do then. It's inappropriate to object to someone facing decades in prison for facilitating consensual transactions between adults?
People who object to a law should use a martyr as a rallying cry to show people the extent which laws are unjust and convince other people and politicians that the laws should be changed.
By making your demand the freeing of someone who may be a martyr but did little to effect actual change in the laws(is not a pivotal leader in the political portion of the movement) you consider unjust, you are not progressing the ideas you believe in. Only trying to undo a single action.
If and when the laws are changed to make the bulk of their actions legal, they will likely be freed then either for legal or political reasons.
> is not a pivotal leader in the political portion of the movement
I don't agree that this matters, but if it did, then certainly DPR is a pivotal leader in the "political portion" of the movement. I'm not sure how you can say he's not?
Because he does not seem to lead any people, or actively promote changes in laws (as evidenced by his choice of defense if nothing else). Instead he seems to be a regular business man, trying to make money. For pivotal leader I am talking a Martin Luther King, not a Reverend Jesse Jackson.
That's all I'm doing.