Jury Summons Response
I cannot, in good conscience, participate in a punitive system. Living in a paradigm wherein the initiation of force is considered suitable, proper, and even necessary to achieve the various ends of mankind has challenged my sense of morality for the greater majority of my life. The fact that we have normalized governments of corrupting powers, theft of taxation, punishment for mistakes, indoctrination for education, “science” that cannot be questioned, stop lights at on-ramps of inefficient road monopoly, even the idea that jury service is a duty (an apparent obligation determined by someone other than myself, or, to the present point, timing out my session on the online "portal" so that I must go through it all again!—the list is endless) neither legitimizes them nor the waste of human energy they impose.
Even if such things are in place, such as informing the jury of their ability to apply jury nullification in a case (if that is even explained anymore), my curiosity of witnessing this aspect of the dysfunction of the State questions whether I can stay in the moment of the trial, in a living, dynamic process that is defined within the parameters of a corpse of a system that will continue using the imposition of coercion to parties on trial regardless of how the jury votes or of my participation within it.
Updated / edited April 20, 2021:
Frederic Bastiat said, in "The Law", when morality and the law contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law.
I'm not a "State-certified" student of law, but what I do understand of it is that laws, those in the truest sense, have evolved from countless exchanges, voluntary and otherwise, and what has been learned from them--a wisdom of the ages, you might say. Those laws are different from many created today with the intention of regulating human action toward particular political aims and ends rather than being applied to each individual independent of any characteristics, or situation each individual finds himself (and of course by "himself" I also mean herself as well, but the need to say that specifically tells, as well, of the perversion of law today). There is little or no distinction between, or among, laws, legislation and the regulations created by unelected bureaucrats who make up a greater part of government today; failure of making the distinction seems to be a large part of the problems we face today. Another, essentially equally large part is in the belief by the majority that laws--or what are called laws--are some sort of magic solution to issues, problems and crises whose causes can be traced back to previous laws, as when coercion is initiated, regardless of intent, it produces human reactions contrary to the natural response where otherwise voluntary exchange is present.
My concern is also that showing up (even "online") under coercion will influence my own attitude about the system in which I am being "involuntarily invited" to participate, and, consequently will influence any decision I make regarding any party sitting before a jury. Frankly, let's not waste each other's time, for that's likely what I would do given the nature of the system.
To force the wasting of one's time is immoral, and generally invites reciprocal measures not helpful to anybody. As for myself, I would rather not be treated like another "useful idiot" as I think Lenin coined the term.