Check out some similar questions!

ETWolverine · Dec 31, 2007, 08:37 AM

Originally Posted by rivalarrival

That's such a lovely attitude. Ignore human suffering if the sufferers don't share your own beliefs. Your ignorant, fundamentalist philosophy is absolutely vile. You are an embarrassment to society and your faith. While I disagree with religious belief, like most Atheists, I have a great respect for the "Love thy neighbor" philosophy espoused by moderate Christians.

Well, not being Christian myself, I follow a different creed. It's called PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. As in "An adult ought to know the laws that pertain to him and live by them, or else should experience the consequences of his actions". You think I'm being heartless... fine. I think you are being foolish to fight for a "cause" that would reward illegal behavior. Perhaps the mistake wasn't Luce's son's fault... but does that mean that we should reward his "error" with the gift of citizenship or legal immigrant status? It "wasn't his fault" because he didn't know the law, but he's still responsible for his own actions. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Here's the deal:

When INS, elected officials, and other interested parties review the petition, they will look at how the signatures were collected. If they were collected under false pretenses, the petition will be thrown out, and Luce will be exposed as a fraud. If not, the petition is valid, and the people will have spoken.

We don't have to trust Luce's word on it. If you believe that deportation is an excessive punishment in the case outlined in the petition, sign it. If you believe deportation is appropriate, don't sign it.

Gee... thanks for giving us your personal permission to not sign. I thought we HAD to sign, or else...

Quite the contrary, you have as much "pull" as every other citizen or resident. Popular opinion becomes public policy in the US.

Really? Since when? Is that how things work where you come from?

The whole point of an elected REPUBLIC is so that people with greater expertise in the issues can make the decisions on those matters without undo pressure from the citizenry, who may not have information, but certainly have strong (and often wrong) opinions. That is why the USA is not direct democacy, but rather a republic.

The petition asks for certain information, but all fields are optional. For instance, I provided my real name, city and state, but not my street address. I could have signed it anonymously if I wanted to. The only mandatory piece of information you give is your IP address, which is collected by every website you ever visit; it's hardly a privacy issue.

Y'mean kind of like how the government does it under the Patriot Act? I agree, it isn't a privacy issue.

It is collected to prevent flooding the system with false signatures.

But without the consent (or even the knowledge) of the signatiries. How does this differ from what the government does under the Patriot Act. Or is the Patriot Act only bad because it's Bush's baby.

The collection at TheJesusMyth was created by TheJesusMyth administration, not Luce, who is only a contributing author. TJM recently (October?) started a regular collection for various altruistic causes. We are collecting to help her alleviate legal fees. If you don't feel the need to donate, or find this "fishy", don't donate.

I have better causes to donate to, as I have explained above.

When the compassion of complete strangers is your primary avenue of defense, you do. Luce is fighting a huge, monolithic bureaucracy. She already has the deck stacked against her. She's looking for help in leveling the playing field, and in the US, there are only two ways to do that: throw money at it, or have a lot of people agree with you. The 641+ people who signed the petition are going to go a lot farther than the $152 she has coming to her from TJM.

Oh baloney. It seems to me that Luce is the proverbial atheist in the foxhole, grabbing at straws and looking for a miracle. She'd be better served spending her time working with attorney's and filing judicial petitions for stays against ICE to keep her son from being deported, rather than online petitions that do nothing more than say that she's justified in her feelings of injustice. Do you really think some bureaucrat in ICE gives a damn about 600 signatures? Do you really think that some elected politician who is trying to please thousands and MILLIONS of voters in his own district every day, cares about 600 signatures from people who's residence (and even existance) he can't verify? No politician or bureaucrat is going to intervene in the system over 600, or 10,000 or even 100,000 signatures that they can't verify.

This is a waste of time. Start trying something that has a chance at actually working, like LEGAL action, not popular activism.

Elliot

tomder55 · Dec 31, 2007, 09:01 AM

Rivalarrival;

You still do not address my primary concern .Why is there a solicitation of funding at TheJesusMyth directed to her personal paypal account? How is the person that donates to it assured it is going towards the defense intended ?

If she is lying, she faces potential civil and possibly criminal charges.

I need better veriifcation of her story than that . Either you can provide it or you can't .

I'll tell you what I haven't found anywhere ,and that is independent verification that this story is real . If the plight of the Van Vuuren family is true can you provide as much as a local newspaper account ? Frankly ;besides this forum and the Jesus myth the only place I've seen this is at the Kossaks DailyKos website .

rivalarrival · Dec 31, 2007, 09:12 AM

But nobody is sending him to Gulag, nobody is sending him into the heart of despotism, and nobody is sending him to a war-torn, poverty-stricken, disease-ridden country where his survival is in question. South Africa has a GDP that is in the top 10% for the entire world, GDP-per-capita that is in the top third for the world, and a GDP growth rate of 5% per annum... a healthy economy, in other words. South Africa is one of the most natural-resource-rich countries in the world, with gold, diamond, platinum, and other minerals, as well as a strong agricultural base in sugar cane, fuits vegetables, cotton, wheat, beef, poultry, daiy products, wool, etc. Your son isn't being sent to hell on Earth. He's being sent to a comfortable country.

Sounds like a real paradise. Too bad he'll never be able to return to his home.

Furthermore, if you knew enough about the law to know that you son had to register for selective service... and even know where to find citations of the law on the internet... why didn't you or your son know that it is illegal for a citizen to vote in elections?

Asked and answered: He did. He was told differently by someone who should have known better. He was registered to vote by New Jersey election officials who apparently didn't even bother to check his identification. He was allowed to vote by New Jersey election officials who also apparently didn't bother to check his identification.

I have better causes to lend my name to... like political refugees from Iran and Syria who are trying to escape tyranny, despotism, and probable death.

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.

I have better causes to lend my name to... like political refugees from Iran and Syria who are trying to escape tyranny, despotism, and probable death.

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.

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.

You took the time out of your day to research this. You looked up economic and agricultural statistics about South Africa. You eloquently painted it as an idyllic place to live.

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.

I leave my conclusions to the reader's imagination.

NeedKarma · Dec 31, 2007, 09:13 AM

RubyPitbull · Dec 31, 2007, 09:30 AM

Now that I know the young man's name, I found a couple of other things Tom. Congress.org
Newsvine - Deported to South Africa for Voting
But, no newspaper accounts.

Rival, has Luce hired an attorney to help her? And, if she hasn't already done so, she should contact her local newspaper, television, & radio stations to gain some public attention to her son's plight. Usually the AP and larger stations will pick up on the smaller personal interest stories if enough public noise is being made. That is what I would do if I was in her position. I think sticking solely to the internet is a mistake. You might want to offer her help with that. It will be much more effective than a petition, asking for donations, or writing to a local rep. If she is able to get the publicity, representatives will sit up and take notice. She also might have a better chance at finding an attorney willing to take her son's case on pro bono.

rivalarrival · Dec 31, 2007, 10:04 AM

You still do not address my primary concern .Why is there a solicitation of funding at TheJesusMyth directed to her personal paypal account? How is the person that donates to it assured it is going towards the defense intended ?

The fund was started by Luce's friends at TJM. It is a convenient method for people who know her to send cash assistance. Luce is part of a well-established online community, her friends trust her and we wanted to support her. There is a TJM article about the reasoning behind the fund here: Altruism Monthly Number 2: Luci's Legal Fund

Do not feel compelled to donate. You have not been asked to do so in this forum. You have only been asked to sign a petition.

I need better veriifcation of her story than that . Either you can provide it or you can't .

Oh baloney. It seems to me that Luce is the proverbial atheist in the foxhole, grabbing at straws and looking for a miracle. She'd be better served spending her time working with attorney's and filing judicial petitions for stays against ICE to keep her son from being deported,

Luce has retained Louis Meltz , an immigration attorney. Mr. Meltz charges $200/hr. You could try contacting his firm, but I doubt they will tell you anything.
Seham Seham Meltz & Petersen, LLC - Louis S. Meltz

I personally cannot provide unbiased confirmation of her story. Luce is my friend and colleague, obviously I trust her, but I understand that you have no reason to trust either of us. The best I can do is remind you that many people and groups have staked their reputations on this. TheJesusMyth has adopted her cause. Brian Sapient of the Rational Response Squad invited her to post on his site. Dozens of Stumblers have posted their support.

The only thing I can tell you at this point is that the petition is worthless if she's lying, and the backlash against her, myself, TJM, and her staunch supporters around the web will not be pleasant at all. If she's telling the truth, the petition may help Erhard Van Vuuren remain in the US and become a citizen.

Referring to the collection of IP addresses:

But without the consent (or even the knowledge) of the signatiries. How does this differ from what the government does under the Patriot Act. Or is the Patriot Act only bad because it's Bush's baby.

From the signature page of the petition:

Your signature will include your IP address which will be available to the author and GoPetition administrators for security reasons.

When you request a web page, (ANY web page) you send your IP address so the web server knows where to send the page. Most web pages log all web traffic, including IP addresses. The signature page of the petition specifically states that your IP address will be recorded with your signature. This is done primarily to prevent scammers from creating a robot that automatically signs the petition a few thousand times.

I have better causes to donate to, as I have explained above.

Don't donate then. I was asked (repeatedly) why there was a collection. You were not asked to donate, you were asked to sign the petition.

This is a waste of time. Start trying something that has a chance at actually working, like LEGAL action, not popular activism.

We're not putting all our eggs in one basket; the petition is just one of the many approaches we are taking. Popular opinion in the US has a nasty habit of becoming public policy.

rivalarrival · Dec 31, 2007, 10:09 AM

Ruby.

I think sticking solely to the internet is a mistake. You might want to offer her help with that. It will be much more effective than a petition, asking for donations, or writing to a local rep. If she is able to get the publicity, representatives will sit up and take notice. She also might have a better chance at finding an attorney willing to take her son's case on pro bono.

Yes she has retained an attorney (details in my last post - sorry I was still typing when you responded)

Several news organizations have been contacted, but to my knowledge, none have picked up the story as yet.

ET,

Perhaps the mistake wasn't Luce's son's fault... but does that mean that we should reward his "error" with the gift of citizenship or legal immigrant status? It "wasn't his fault" because he didn't know the law, but he's still responsible for his own actions. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

You are correct, but you ignore mitigating circumstances, which are just as large a part of the law.

I used this analogy elsewhere: Suppose a contractor is hired to install a guardrail on a curve in the road. Suppose two days later that a driver loses control of his car, goes off the road and hits the guardrail. Obviously the driver is responsible for losing control of his vehicle. But, because the contractor made grievous errors in installing the guardrail, it failed under a load far less than it was designed to tolerate before failing. The vehicle goes through the guardrail, over the embankment, and falls 300 feet down the cliff.

Are you telling me that the contractor in this case bears no culpability for the deaths of these people? With the logic you employ, we should not even bother putting up the guardrail: it is the driver's sole responsibility to keep his car on the road, and he is entirely to blame for any deviation, regardless of the reasoning. It is for these reasons that due process in adjudicating crimes involves a jury of the defendant's peers. This helps to ensure that a defendant gets a fair trial, and doesn't get railroaded into punishment for a reasonable action that happened to be a crime. Like swerving off a road to avoid hitting a child. Swerving off a road is a crime, but it is also a reasonable course of action given the circumstances. Do we punish the driver in this situation?

Election officials are tasked with ensuring the integrity of our electoral process. They are held to a much higher standard than the layperson. On at least two occasions, they screwed up, allowing a non-citizen to both register and vote. Erhard's "error" was in listening to political campaigners when they told him he was allowed to vote. His error would have sent him into the guardrail, so to speak, but it is the mistakes made by election officials that allowed the car to go over the edge. So yes, punish Erhard for losing control of his vehicle: warn him, fine him, take away his driver's license. But to punish him for going off the cliff while the contractor walks is asinine.

INS officials would not even be aware that Erhard had voted if he had not informed them. Erhard volunteered this information at a citizenship hearing.

I'm not saying Erhard is completely innocent, I'm saying that the greatest culpability in this case goes to the people charged specifically with ensuring the integrity of the election.

Really? Since when? Is that how things work where you come from?

The whole point of an elected REPUBLIC is so that people with greater expertise in the issues can make the decisions on those matters without undo pressure from the citizenry, who may not have information, but certainly have strong (and often wrong) opinions. That is why the USA is not direct democacy, but rather a republic.

Except that strong and wrong opinions DO become public policy, based on the will of the people. The "elected" part of "elected republic" means that the representatives will represent the popular will of the people, or they will be voted out of office. Politicians have no greater expertise than the people. They have popular support for their opinions, or they don't have a job.

ETWolverine · Dec 31, 2007, 12:44 PM

I used this analogy elsewhere: Suppose a contractor is hired to install a guardrail on a curve in the road. Suppose two days later that a driver loses control of his car, goes off the road and hits the guardrail. Obviously the driver is responsible for losing control of his vehicle. But, because the contractor made grievous errors in installing the guardrail, it failed under a load far less than it was designed to tolerate before failing. The vehicle goes through the guardrail, over the embankment, and falls 300 feet down the cliff.

Nice analogy, but not entirely accurate. You see, if the driver of the vehicle that lost control was unlicensed to drive, all culpability automatically falls to him under the law, regardless of the poor construction of the contractor. Similarly, Erhard was not allowed to vote. The fact that the system "collapsed under his weight" doesn't detract from the fact that he had no legal right to vote in the first place. Did the polling officials screw up? Absolutely. And they should be disciplined for it... including termination of employment, if I had my way. But that doesn't mean that Erhard gets to stay.

Except that strong and wrong opinions DO become public policy, based on the will of the people. The "elected" part of "elected republic" means that the representatives will represent the popular will of the people, or they will be voted out of office. Politicians have no greater expertise than the people. They have popular support for their opinions, or they don't have a job.

But we don't govern based on poll numbers... or we shouldn't anyway. I know of one political bigwig running for major office who's husband did just that. Yes, if an elected official ticks off his contituency, he'll be voted out of office. But in reality, people only get ticked off if the RESULTS are bad.

Giuliani's tenor as Mayor of NY City is a perfect example: He was a VERY unpopular guy for a few years. There was huge public outcry against much of what he was trying to accomplish... getting rid of the porn shops, prostitutes and adult "entertainment" industry. Cleaning up crime by giving cops a freer hand to do their jobs ticked off a lot of people who were anti-cop in this city... cops were very unpopular during the Dinkins and Koch administrations. Giuliani did a lot of things that were highly unpopular at the time. But he was SUCCESSFUL in his atempts to lower crime, make the city safer, and bring back the economic boom and tourism to the city. And in the end, the people were quite happy with the results.

If Giuliani had gone with what was "popular opinion", none of this would have been accomplished. And it HAD to be accomplished. So Giuliani ignored public opinion, and did his job. And his poll numbers clearly reflect his lack of popularity during his first term. But he let his accomplishments speak for themselves, and became the most successful mayor of NY city in the past century (IMO).

That's how our republican system works... we vote for people who we believe can do the job and then we give them a period in which to accomplish those goals. We don't have the ability to simply oust someone from office immediately upon their first perceived "failure". AFTER A TIME, we decide whether we like what that person has done or not. But our system is NOT built on the idea of popular rule... it is based on representative rule. "Wrong opinions" of the majority may get someone elected or voted out of office, but those wrong opinions do not automatically policy or law.

Elliot

rivalarrival · Dec 31, 2007, 02:51 PM

Nice analogy, but not entirely accurate. You see, if the driver of the vehicle that lost control was unlicensed to drive, all culpability automatically falls to him under the law, regardless of the poor construction of the contractor.

For the most part, this is true. The contractor's negligence would be seriously mitigated in these circumstances, but not entirely eliminated. While he [b]might[b] not be held criminally liable for killing the passengers of the vehicle, he would still be guilty of criminal negligence, and possibly depraved indifference, given the nature of the work. And let's not forget the civil suit: wrongful death is practically a lock.

All that said, you're committing category errors. You describe a situation where two "crimes" are committed -1. Driving without a license, and 2. failure to maintain control of the vehicle. What is Erhard's second crime?

If Erhard voted because he was committing some other crime, he would bear a larger portion of the responsibility for the repercussions. If he had concealed his citizenship status, for instance, this would be a different story. He did not: he informed the campaigner that he was a legal immigrant who had registered for selective service.

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.

There's a big difference between taking personal responsibility for your actions and falling on your sword to cover up the mistakes of others.

That's how our republican system works...

This is getting well beyond the scope of this thread... I appreciate your position, I don't disagree, and I would love to discuss it further, but I do not wish to detract from the matter at hand.

RecCatholic · Jan 1, 2008, 09:29 PM

TheSavage... I want to thank you for calling attention to this petition. It is of utmost importance for Luci and her family that we support her. Tomder55... I will save you the work of looking me up. I am also an author on TheJesusMyth.com. You will see from my username, however, that I am a fence sitter. I use that site to ask questions about my faith in the hope that someone will help me understand what it is that I am supposed to be believing in. You should stop by sometime and answer some questions... I am honestly needing clarification on why I should remain loyal to a church that treats people the way that you are treating Luci and her family. It's because of people like you that I am embarrassed to be associated with a faith that claims that they care about all people. Are you one of those people who PRAY about everything? Or are you going to step away from your computer screen and DO something?

RecCatholic · Jan 1, 2008, 09:56 PM

Tomder55... keep checking TheJesusMyth for the clarification you and others so desire. I have it on good authority that the local media will be getting whiff of Luci's story soon. Then I expect to see your name on that petition, since proof is all you are really asking for.

Synnen · Jan 2, 2008, 02:05 AM

Just want to say that I'm not signing either... and Snopes explains it far better than I could WHY I'm not signing

Urban Legends Reference Pages: Internet Petitions

There is absolutely NO point to an internet petition. If you were standing outside my grocery store with an ACTUAL petition, one that was well-written and addressed to someone who could actually do something about it--I'd THINK about signing it.

A lawyer is far more likely to get results than a petition, and frankly--I don't want to give my personal information out to a bunch of strangers who could be wackos impersonating the real victims on the internet.

And for all YOU know, I'm Charles Manson and typing from prison--want THAT name on your petition? And even if I'm NOT Charles Manson, or Ted Bundy, or whoever---I can SIGN that way.

It's not that I don't think our justice system is whacked beyond belief, or think that our immigration system is perfect. I just don't think a petition does what the people circulating them think it will do.

tomder55 · Jan 2, 2008, 03:35 AM

I am honestly needing clarification on why I should remain loyal to a church that treats people the way that you are treating Luci and her family.

So far all I have done is ask for verification of the story . I have not "treated her family " one way or the other. It is your site that posted requests for donations to her paypal account. Had I been soliciting funds in such a manner I would expect to be asked to provide proof and accountability .

As for your questions about your faith ;Everyone should question the premise of their faith ;there is nothing wrong with that. Do you spend an equal amt. of time discussing it with the clergy as you do posting on an atheist site? Perhaps there is where you would find your answers. Don't ask me. I hardly consider myself either an expert or a good example .

Anyway ;my faith is irrelevant to the question at hand. I wish Luci all the luck in the world .But I will not be signing the petition. I have seen the NJ voter registration form and it clearly states in bold print that you can register to vote if:
YOU ARE A U.S.CITIZEN

There is also a declaration that asks you to swear or affirm that I am a US citizen.

The above declaration carries up to a $15,000 fine,and a possible imprisonment up to 5 years .However it doesn't say anything about deportation so perhaps that is something to hang a hat on.

http://www.nj.gov/oag/elections/form...b)10.18.07.pdf

NeedKarma · Jan 2, 2008, 04:00 AM

Tom, it looks like a veiled attempt to drive traffic to their site. I wouldn't bother.

tomder55 · Jan 2, 2008, 04:09 AM

NK ;

I have been to their site before having been directed there by some atheists on another Q&A site. I believe the story to be true as far as it is told .Perhaps there is even a case to be made that it is an injustice in that the punishment doesn't fit the crime.

I have been on the net long enough to know however that not all that is said is true and it is not unreasonable to ask for beyond a doubt verification of the story . The fact that now my faith is being questioned because of the issues I raised only makes me more suspicious.

But I do note that in the last couple of days there is talk on the site to getting the story put out in a legitimate news outlet so perhaps I have contributed to their effort.

RecCatholic · Jan 2, 2008, 08:35 AM

tomder55~ I am sorry if you felt that I challenged your faith. Like I said, however, I am questioning everyone I meet in the hopes that someone will help me with my issues, and the fact that most (I am sorry if this isn't you) Christians are say and not do people, and since this is such an important issue to me I feel even more frustrated by that. Also, ironically enough, I spent 6 years in Catholic grade school and all of my college years in a private Catholic college. I kept getting different answers from the people that are supposed to know them and so I have now turned to you (again generally), the person of faith, to see if you can explain things to me. I am not being sarcastic about it... this has been a problem for me for about 11 years now and I have only been writing for this site for about 1.

I'm sorry. I know that I just posted, but if you go to TheJesusMyth and look under the post "To Be Deported for Voting" you will find, in the comment section, a whole list of congress men and women as well as senators and I think even a governor who are all helping in this situation. Emails, phone and fax numbers are given as well. Hopefully that will help verify this story as well for some of you.

ETWolverine · Jan 2, 2008, 09:31 AM

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.

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.

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.

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..

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 existence 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?

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

RecCatholic · Jan 2, 2008, 01:07 PM

NeedKarma-Honestly I hope that this information DOES send traffic to TheJesusMyth website because that is where all of Luci's information is on this issue as well as an article from Erhard himself. Not only that, but in the coming days that is where you will find the links to the news articles and interviews about this story.

NeedKarma · Jan 2, 2008, 02:10 PM

Sorry mate, not interested.

RecCatholic · Jan 2, 2008, 03:45 PM

Oh sorry. I thought you were interested since you keep coming back to this conversation to see what is going on.