Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rivalarrival Sounds like a real paradise. Too bad he'll never be able to return to his home. |
His home is South Africa. He was just a visitor in the USA. If he had obtained citizenship, THEN the USA would be his home.
Quote:
What you are saying is that you believe it is not worth your time or effort to ensure that victims of fraud are treated fairly, rather then separated from their families and sent half a world away.
What you are saying is that it is a better use of your time to type several hundred words condemning a mother for trying to keep her family together, than to add a signature to a petition.
|
Yup... that pretty much sums it up. I'm a big believer in "caveat emptor" and personal responsibility. It was Erhard's responsibility to know that he wasn't allowed to vote. He got bad advice? Let him ask someone better informed next time. He feels he got screwed? Let him sue the pollster that told him it was ok to vote. But none of that eliminates HIS primary responsibility.
Quote:
|
You say this like you somehow only have the ability to help either refugees or Erhard. Like somehow signing this petition will somehow prohibit you from giving aid and comfort to people who need it.
|
I say it as someone who only attaches his name to causes he believes in. I say it as someone who believes that ading my name to a cause that I don't believe in makes the use of my name weaker when it is needed. I say it as someone who believes that if my name is attached to every rinky-dink petition I see, then when something comes along that REALLY deserves my attention, someone reading the poll names will say "Oh, it's that guy, Elliot... he'll sign anything. Who cares what he thinks anyway." My name is an asset, and it is an asset with limited value. Overusing that asset wastes its value.
Quote:
|
You made an effort to write all that. You took time out of your day to write about the Van Vuurens, time that you could have spent writing about refugees and the horrible conditions they face. But you didn't do that, you wrote about the Van Vuurens.
|
I have written about the plight of refugees in the past. I have also written about those who claim to be "refugees" but aren't. I've written on a number of topics related to immigration, citizenship and deportation. I've written about them on various boards for over a decade... This time I wrote about the Van Vuurens. Your issue with that is...?
Quote:
What you are really saying is quite simple, just spit it out: You don't think Erhard deserves a second chance. You don't care that he may have been tricked, that he may be a victim of an overzealous political campaign. You don't care that election officials either ignored or blatantly disregarded voter registration and election rules.
But it's not just about "not caring" - no, you've taken it a step further - you've made an effort out of not caring. You've made an effort to denigrate her beliefs. You've made an effort to tell her that her family is not worth your time, not even worth your signature. You've made an effort to inform her that not only is her effort not worth your time, countering her effort IS an effective use.
|
Actually I don't believe that Erhard deserves my support... or anyone else's on this board. What his family does through the legal system is none of my concern.
But what I have a REAL problem with is trying to get a bunch of dupes who don't know the circumstances, the details, the facts of the case to sign a petition on behalf of someone they don't know... and then have a bunch of people come out of the woodwork from other sites to jump all over us when we call her on it or ask her for confirmation of the facts. I find it abusive, insulting and yes, I made it my business to make that position clear.
As for denigrating her beliefs, let's take a few of luci's quote's fom the Jesus Myth website:
"God is not the answer, it is the problem; "
"The absurdity of religion" (Title of an article)
"These babies have to grow up without the mother because of a verse in
an ancient book full of mistakes?"
"The god of the Jehovah’s finds it preferable that a mother die and leave her children without a stable family than accept a blood transfusion.
Always handy to know where a particular deities priorities lie."
"Is it ever possible to prove that religious are not hallucinations or delusions?"
"Jesus actually committed suicide"
"I just don’t believe the world is on the eve of destruction because a few people enjoy anal sex and women wear shorter garments over their legs these days."
"I don’t even want to bore you with the impossibilities of the above story of Adam and Eve, the inbreeding impossibilities and millions of other things wrong with
this dim-witted story."
"What is the biggest lie ever told? I honestly think it’s that the world was made to believe there is a God. What can beat it?"
"And lo and behold, I got the boyfriend. A wonderful guy whose life ambition was to become a Dutch Reformed minister!! URGHH. I knew I would NEVER be able to be a minister’s wife, I wanted a life, not a damn congregation. "
You want to talk about denigrating people's beliefs, I suggest you look a little closer to home.
I also find it ridiculous that anyone would look for a miracle for their son while at the same time denying the existance of G-d. And make no mistake... that is exactly what the petition is: an attempt to create a miracle.
What do they say about atheists in a foxhole?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rivalarrival The only crime was the vote, the swerving off the road. Voting was a reasonable and rational response to the information he had available to him: he was told he was permitted to vote by a person registering voters. This person would be considered a professional in the field of voter registration. This person should have been aware of the requirements to vote. This person was the kid in the road that Erhard swerved to miss. At least twice after that, "guardrails" to prevent him from voting failed due to the fault of contractors/election officials. |
Erhard's crime was not "swerving", but rather "driving the car without a license"... in this case, voting when not being allowed to. Cops don't need a "second crime" to take action against an unlicensed driver who is caught behind the wheel. Erhard may have "driven" perfectly carefully, obeying all the "traffic laws"... except the one that says that you have to be licensed to drive. The fact that he's a good driver doesn't mitigate the fact that he was unlicensed.
Erhard voted when it was illegal for him to do so. Immigration officials called him on it and are considering deporting him. the fact that someone told him it was okay to do it, the fact that he wasn't stopped from doing it, doesn't make it legal. HE had the responsibility to know that he wasn't allowed to "get behind that wheel" and vote, even if someone else told him it was ok.
Elliot
Linear Mode
