From One Man’s Journey from “Rule of Law” to Golden Rule, it appears as if
Robb Pearson himself has joined our conversation. Welcome Robb.
He writes, in part the following:
Greetings to everyone.
It was a colleague who informed me about this article, so I took a visit, read a number of the comments, and decided to offer my own.
The author of this article made mention that “what was clear to me, was that Robb Pearson expressed the feeling that he wasn’t even sure how he had been caught up in this anti immigrant frenzy initially.”
In many ways that’s quite true. At certain moments in our lives I think we all get caught up in something (sometimes benign, sometimes not) without realizing how we got there in the first place. But in retrospect, I can identify two factors which seminally contributed to the “seduction” which had captured me: (1) my own decision back in early 2005 to examine, experience, and participate in “politics” and (2) my close association with certain people whom I’d encountered as a result of my entry into “politics”.
Elena asked:
I’m wondering about that as well.
Moon-howler,
Your post earlier today was very sweet; you are too cool!
I do take a look at the other blog and post comments on it quite often. When I read statements in which people stereotype, jump to conclusions, etc., I try to engage them in conversations about it.
Most of the posters who respond disagree with me, of course, and some are not very nice about it. I’ve been called annoying, a liberal (ooo, a dirty word, huh?), a caricature, a clueless lefty…the list goes on. I’ve also been told by Emma that my handle evokes pain. A couple of people are even trying to figure out who I am, and have accused me of being other people on the Anti-BVBL site. I can’t for the life of me figure out why they would even care who I am in the real world.
Some posters on that site, however, do try to stick to their arguments, which I appreciate. It’s interesting to read what they have to say, at the very least. Once in awhile, I’ll find another like-minded person on that site who backs me up, or makes similar challenges. In any case, I must admit that THIS is the place that I truly feel at home:) (Y’all are awesome!)
More for Robb Pearson:
I’m appealing to you because I hope there was something you could say to reach Chairman Stewart. Those of us who knew him before the Anti-Immigrant Lobby got to him continuously marvel at his complete transformation. When he first ran for Chair in a special election in 2006, he did so as an environmentalist claiming he would put a stop to the over-development that was eating up our parks and open space while clogging up our freeways. But starting in June of 2007, he was seduced by both the national and the local networks of the Anti-Immigrant Lobby, often appearing on cable news programs while jamming through the infamous Immigration Resolution that tore this county apart.
Knowing him personally, I cannot for the life of me figure out what he thought F.A.I.R., Help Save Manassas, and NumbersUSA had to offer him back in 2007. He had little to fear of losing his Chairmanship in a decidedly Republican county with a politically inexperienced challenger that November. But now that the Anti-Immigrant Lobby has its hooks firmly embedded in his hide, I can see why he feels he needs them.
1) He has alienated just about every other constituency group in this county and in this state, leaving him with a coalition of the intolerant, the apathetic, the strictly partisan, and the ill-informed. With the Obama wave building, all four of those constituency groups are shrinking, and Stewart feels he cannot reach higher office in Virginia without the loyalty of the one constituency group he has been loyal to.
2) The extremist wing of the Virginia Republican party has anointed Corey Stewart as their heir apparent, a “future leader of the Commonwealth” while forcing our moderate elder statesmen into retirement. With all the media, lobbyist, and partisan attention Chairman Stewart has received, he feels he cannot change course on his Anti-immigrant branding (even though his fellow Board members changed course on his Anti-immigrant policy this past April). So, without the legislation to tout, he continues his media tour armed with rhetoric only, basing the “success” of Prince William County’s Immigration Resolution on bogus, in fact diametrically false, crime statistics and the offensive “victory” of having less Hispanic American children in our schools.
Our community cannot heal, and we cannot rehabilitate our currently disgraceful reputation, until we have a leader who represents, not only our common humanity, but also our common goals as a community: top notch schools, public safety, improved transportation, a growing economy etc. All of these things have been seriously damaged by this year of rudderless government caused a Chairman who is somehow more invested in the fate of a D.C. lobbying firm’s national agenda than in the future of this community.
So my question to you is: what sort of approach should we take to reach Corey Stewart? You may know better than we, because you have returned from a journey perhaps similar to the one on which he is currently lost.
Moon Howler,
I wasn’t going to bring this up but I had a long conversation today with a constitutional lawyer who has presented cases before the Supreme Court. He told me that in his opinion, police officers perjure themselves 90% of the time on the witness stand. He told me this without my even asking him to give an opinion on the police.
Perjury is also known as lying, and when done on the witness stand it is criminal. When it is done in the name of the law, it is more appropriately called Tyranny, and raises righteous concern about the continuing legitimacy of our justice system.
He also left me with a bit of wisdom that I thought was interesting. He said that the only difference between a judge and a prosecutor, is where they are physically situated in the courtroom. Quite a damning statement, but undoubtedly true most of the time.
It’s a shell game. You only think it’s fair.
On 19 July 2008, 10:03, NotGregLetiecq stated:
You’re welcome. And I took a look at the video of Greg Letiecq’s little sermonette.
The ultimate revelation of the type of corrosive thinking and heartset he employs is when he said the following: “These human beings are sufering terribly. And not only do we want to send them back, but we want to send them back with love.”
I was utterly disgusted at that statement. Any individual who genuinely understood Jesus and how he engaged others would realize that when it came to people who were “suffering terribly”, Jesus never pushed them away “with love”. He embraced them. Wholly and completely.
Indulge me as I do some deeper excavating of Letiecq’s statements, albeit it’s the kind of wearisome exercise I ordinarily wouldn’t care to engage in. But considering Letiecq’s obvious abuse of Scripture (which I take seriously, though not literally) to attempt supporting his own nationalist agenda, such an excavation seems apropos. And I apologize in advance for this post’s lengthiness.
Toward the beginning of the video Greg Letiecq quotes a passage from a Bible book known as “Letter to the Romans”, believed to have been written by the apostle Paul. Specifically he quoted from Romans 13:1-2, New International Reader’s Version, which reads:
Basically Letiecq is of the belief that the US government is instituted by “God”, and that to oppose any of the US government’s policies is to oppose “God”. Unfortunately his theory doesn’t hold up to even the most basic scrutiny. (And in deconstructing his theory, I’m going to utilize Letiecq’s very own tool and method: the Bible, and a technique known as “text proofing”).
The first thing I found interesting, if not ironic, was when Letiecq said the following:
In speaking of the “law”, particularly as he relates it to the “gospel” and the “sacrifice” of Jesus, Letiecq cannot possibly be referring to American law since American law is based on civil particulars, not theocratic (or theological) ones. No, Letiecq can only be referring to the Mosaic Law (i.e., the first five books of the Bible: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy), especially considering its Bible-based relevance to the Gospel. In fact, Letiecq was likely referring directly to what the apostle Paul stated at Romans 3:19-20, as follows:
Paul, in this portion of the letter he wrote to a Christian congregation in Rome at the time, was not at all concerned with secular law, especially when considering the whole context of the entirety of Romans chapter 3, which was all about the Hebrew law (or the “very words of God” given to the Jews; see 3:2). No, he was concerned with religious law, specifically the Hebrew, or Mosaic Law.
Anyway, since Letiecq has what at first glance appears to be a keen understanding of the Mosaic Law (which, in the end, he doesn’t), perhaps he should be reminded of the following requirement within the Mosaic Law found at Leviticus 19:33-34 (and using what is evidently Letiecq’s preferred Bible version, the NIRV):
Here’s more from Numbers 15:14-16 (this time using the NIV version, in order to emphasize the use of the word ‘alien’):
Now, let’s tie things together here. Letiecq seems to believe that the Mosaic Law has paramount relevance to the Gospel. The apostle Paul would agree, as we’ve already established. But Jesus himself would agree as well. See what Jesus himself said at Matthew 5:17-19):
Seems pretty clear to me. Hey, not even Letiecq can deny that Jesus said himself that the Mosaic Law is of paramount relevance to the gospel above any man-made law (by virtue of the fact that the Mosaic Law was directly imparted by God). Jesus said that not one part of the law should be broken. Which means Letiecq cannot deny that he is obligated to treat “outsiders” and “aliens” as if they were his own people (i.e., Americans). And mind you, neither the Mosaic Law nor Jesus makes a distinction between a “legal” alien or an “illegal” one. Therefore Letiecq, according to his “God’s law” theory, has no basis for making that distinction either.
His own “law” argument implodes and turns right back on him.
As to Letiecq’s quoting of Paul’s words about “those who rule over you” and how the “authorities” are instituted by God, I can confidently chalk it up to this simple statement: that was merely Paul’s opinion, and has absolutely no authoritative bearing on anyone whatsoever. Many people do not realize that Paul on two occasions confessed that certain things he taught were just his own personal opinion, such as at 1 Corinthians 7:25 and 7:39-40. With this in mind it is reasonable to conclude that all of Paul’s words are potentially, if not likely, nothing more than his unauthoritative opinion. There is in fact nothing which compels us to believe otherwise (unless you’ve bought into the silly notion that the Bible is authoritative because the Bible says so.)
And that makes Letiecq’s interpretations nothing more than empty rhetoric borne of what is clearly nothing more than motivated self-interest.
To Elena and WhyHereWhyNow . . .
I just spent a small eternity writing a really long post about Greg Letiecq’s video. I promise, though, that I will respond to your most recent posts and questions as soon as I can. I have a rather busy day tomorrow (Sunday), so it probably won’t be until later in the evening, if not Monday morning. For now though, time for me to go to bed.
Until later,
Be well.
Mackie,
I honestly think that is another topic for another time. Right now I think it is important to support our PWCPD. Would you have some lying blow-hard tear them apart? I don’t think so.
Would you have Chief Deane accused of cavorting with the Mexican government? Those types of accusations impugn every officer on the force and simply have no business in the discussion. What prompted my comments was reading someone on THE ASYLUM calling the PWCPD ‘turds’ because it was assumed they hadn’t called in gang graffiti.
I am not ready to go over to the dark side. Disparaging remarks about local law enforcement are written there all the time. It is important to me that people on this blog that I consider friends and allies show unity towards our LEOs. For conservatives who shriek and scream about the Rule of Law all the time, Many certainly show no respect for those who enforce the law.
There will always be bad apples in every profession. Cops, priests, mechanics, shrinks, teachers. We have to sort those out and not broad brush an entire profession based on a few. As for your lawyer buddy, the operative word there is opinion.
What would you have as an alternative to the police?
KG, I did openly apologize to Twinad on another thread, but while Elena and Twinad are busily falling all over each other to worship and sacrifice at the altar of Gospel Robb, they conveniently omitted that detail. How utterly unlike Saint Paul, but whatever. It’s quite revealing, really. But I do think you, KG for your initially kind words.
Robb, “pearls before swine”? Your arrogance is staggering. But don’t worry, your sheep will follow. Mackie is quite typical of the anarchic, trash-law-enforcement-because-all-laws-are-stupid brigade here, and I can tell you that reasonable people who read that nonsense will have none of the lies and the outright vendetta that this blog was meant to be. But you don’t care about citizens who have to live with some of the fallout of illegal immigration, do you, Robb? Those are your “swine,” aren’t they?
Emma,
You came on to this blog with guns blaring that caused your temporary “time out” period, so any attempts to portray yourself as a centrist that has somehow been alienated is pure fiction.
Bring it On, why don’t you explain your “centrist” views to Gospel Robb on this:
Surely you didn’t mean to slam an entire population there, now, did you?
Or you were just showing your elitist colors…
Emma,
But clearly your apology was not sincere, so why should I mention it.
“KG, I did openly apologize to Twinad on another thread, but while Elena and Twinad are busily falling all over each other to worship and sacrifice at the altar of Gospel Robb, they conveniently omitted that detail. How utterly unlike Saint Paul, but whatever. It’s quite revealing, really. But I do think you, KG for your initially kind words.”
See, there was not pingback (or whatever that is) to show the conversation, so I’m getting it again for the first time. I might have commented on the original but I don’t recall it specifically.
You know, as I told someone the other day, I have this “thing” about unity and reconciliation. It bugs me when we can’t all pull together and make things work. We end up blaming and finger pointing and name calling (all of us at one point or another and often for rational reasons) but it is fruitless and frustrating. And it’s hurtful. If there is one thing I would wish for on this planet it is a “hurt reduction act.” Let’s plan on reducing hurt by at least 10% in the upcoming months. What do you think? Shall we pass it?
Robb,
Thank you for that very indepth analysis of Greg’s diatribe. I have always found it interesting how people can misuse the bible to propogate hate against his fellow man. Nothing new, unfortunately.
Moon-howler,
I thought I was a free man, but I’m just an ant. But thank God, I know I am an ant.
Know thyself.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5232639329002339531&q=FIAT
Robb, thanks for your explication of GL’s holy message. Whenever I hear those words come out of his mouth I can’t help but think, “He is obviously insane” in the same sense of those who perpetuate “holy wars.” There is no difference between his religious-based rhetoric and the hatred we hear from TRUE terrorists. Ironically, he cannot see that.
When we have basic philosophical chasms like this, the only thing we as citizens can do is turn to more objective sources of reconciliation: due process, the power of legislative branches to reform, and adherence to principles defending basic human rights. As citizens and human beings, in this county, we have been denied due process. This resolution and its effects have been inflicted on us, not elected by us.
When we have religious disagreements, we must think about what we have in common, and Robb, as you point out, that is unity. The majority can at least agree that “God” (whatever or whomever you believe that is) does not want us to destroy ourselves or each other. And right now, we are doing just that.
” thought I was a free man, but I’m just an ant. But thank God, I know I am an ant.”
Mackie, the difference between you and me is I believe I am an ant who can move a rubber-tree-plant. 🙂
We all will need help to do this, however. So everyone…….PULL!
Elena, I honestly don’t care if you believe it or not. Twinad was giving it as well as she was taking it. Look down at your shoes, you keep tripping over your own BS and still haven’t noticed.
Emma,
Again…this is the evidence of an attempted reasonable connection with people on this site?? Elvis spoke to Elena in the following way (on “The Flip Side of the Sign”) today:
“I’m seriously starting to doubt your intelligence level, I’m thinking it’s somewhere between a rock and a pile of dirt.”
Yikes!
You know, the pressure to be right is very destructive. We can never be right until we realize everyone is right. The truth is owned by none and shared by all. Whether you agree with this or not, “You are right.” 🙂
Juturna,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLnQku6sdVo
Chris, I know you like this one 🙂
Robb,
Will you come visit us in Prince William? You should come to one of the Save Prince William’s Economy parties organized by antibvbl and 9500liberty.
Alanna and Elena,
By the way, when is the next one?
Robb, thank you very much for your erudite, insightful, and even foot-noted deconstruction of Greg Letiecq’s gospel video.
For those who don’t know what we’re talking about:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAWEMOgAJw
Back in the dark days when the GregNCorey Show (Greg Letiecq and Chairman Corey Stewart’s coordinated media/new media campaign) this video was the first clear sign that our county was being led astray by madmen. I am not a Bible expert, so I did not have the background necessary to refute what Greg says in that video, but I sensed what KGotthardt described … a disturbing parallel between Greg Letiecq and other madmen who have used religion to justify war on his fellow man. For those of us who are not very religious, this can be as frightening as it is offense for those who are.
Now that I’ve seen your essay in response to the video, I fully understand why religious people have told me how offended they were by this video. When Greg posted this on his blog, by the way, even his own followers couldn’t get behind this message. But it was campaign season, and they decided to look the other way until after the election. At that point, the members of his cult-like organization (Help Save Manassas) started to politely beg off of their duties. Some even asked to have their names removed from their website.
I wonder if the video had anything to do with it.
More later….
I do believe that humility is THE key to understanding and being able to accept the things you can and cannot change.
I think when things are done with the heart of humility it transforms passion to compassion.
My Wish for EVERYONE in this debate, is that while we run with passion ( our own individual convictions) we do it with compassion. 🙂
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_zi4OxJpY0
anonfornow,
It would be amazing to have Robb come visit us in Prince William. We don’t have another party scheduled right now, but there is a screening of the new 9500liberty video at Trinity Episcopal Church on Friday. I’ll post it as a thread soon. For now, here is the info.
When: Friday, July 25th at 7:30pm
Where: Trinity Episcopal Church
9325 West Street Manassas, VA 20110
Is this the same film as the one shown at Casa Blanca?
Maybe we could fix that no party situation.
Where: Trinity Episcopal Church
Cool. A fine venue for a coronation.
Your choice – Asylum or Church. Hmmmm…. which will es_la_lie pick?????
Anyone going Tuesday to the BOCS meeting?
I’m so upset that I can’t make the showing at Trinity; I’ll be on vacation. Are they showing any new footage?
I’m a little unclear how Gospel Robb’s discovery of his homosexuality (silentlambs.org/silentlambsrobpearson.htm) is related to an “epiphany” that 12-20 million illegal immigrants should be granted amnesty (let them stay!) and that our borders must be wide open in order to prove how loving and tolerant we are as a nation. Gospel Robb can broad-brush the issue as being about nothing more than racism and intolerance, or perhaps he himself could have a little tolerance for those who are looking at the broader issues of national security, economics, livable neighborhoods and fairness for ALL persons wishing to enter the U.S., not just Latinos. Or I guess he could call them all “swine” and compare his journey with that of a great saint.
Were you being blackmailed, Robb? Otherwise, how are the two issues related? Really, you have nothing to be ashamed of, and I know from a dear family member of mine what a struggle you might have endured in coming out. I’m just perplexed at where your sense of moral and spiritual superiority is coming from.
It’s kind of like what you said here, Robb:
Our cute but deceived and self-hypnotised li’l Emma has come up with an interesting attac on the man who had a change of heart. “Yeah but you used to use my talking points.”
Emma! think about it. One of the things that make Mr. Pearson so much more enlightened and more compelling than you is the fact that he no longer decieved, no longer self-hypnotized, and he no longer uses your talking points.
He now sees that he was putting his considerable talents to use for a lost and immoral cause. Now he has mended his ways and is trying to bridge gaps and find common ground.
When will you make ammends li’l Emma?
The ugliness with which you attack messengers only nmakes us less convinced that you are able to grasp, let alone respond to a meaningful message.
Ugly? How? I thought Robb’s comments about Americans were quite eloquent but, unlike you, I won’t be deceived into idol worship.
Of course you would think it is “immoral” to control immigration to some degree and to protect U.S. borders, since you seem to think that the U.S. has an unlimited supply of cash to support the tide of the world’s poor. Your Disneyland world view is as cute as your name, NotGreg.
“l’il”–true. “Cute”–true. Make amends–for what?
I guess you are all puffed up over ‘outing’ Robb aren’t you there, Evangelical Emma. Your intent was was evil. No, you aren’t little and cute. Get over yourself. I actually doubt if you are female. How are things at work, by the way?
Robb, thanks for taking the time to suffer Greg Letiecq’s horrendously offensive misuse of the Bible, and then ripping his argument to shreds for all to see. Honestly, you far surpassed my expectations, sounding a good deal more like a Biblical scholar than someone who might well have encountered Greg Letiecq’s political masters in the Anti-Immigrant Lobby. Someone asked above and I am also quite curious how high up the food chain you got. Did you ever talk to Mike Hethmon or Dan Stein from FAIR? What about Rob Beck from NumbersUSA?
Back to Gospel Greg. I don’t think he actually believes most of the stuff he preaches, about not his bogus statistics, not hysterically alarmist fears of invasion, disease, higher taxes, etc., and certainly not his Gospel Greg routine. No, what I find most offensive about the man is he thinks so little of the average citizen that he expects us to believe the b.s. he feeds us.
I’m wondering, Robb, if you would have received Greg’s perversion of Holy Scripture any differently back in the dark days of 2007.
Oh for Pete’s sake, if I was starving and living in Mexico with my two kids and husband and my husband came to me and said “honey, I am going to sneak over the border and make some money to pay for food and for education for the kids”, I would say “how many sandwiches do you want me to make you”.
Should the criminal element be here – no
Should the freeloaders be here – no.
Now what don’t we agree about that it makes us all go nuts with Bibles, God, needing to be so GD right all the time. You are all making me sick with your rat-a-tat-tat and your pointing fingers and whining.
Go read a book -go thank God or the spirits that you were born here and not there.
If you are in need of self-esteem, try exercise and vitamins…..
Robb, this post is for you as well as all the regulars. I just have to complement the many contributors to this blog for creating a truly invaluable public services here. As I’ve said, even the hateful partisans like Emma contribute in no small way to progress. (Emma, FYI: hate is ugly, it just is.)
The exchanges on this blog DO reach people who are interested in dialog rather than conflict. There are hundreds of people in this county who read this blog but do not jump in to the debate. Members of our county government and Board of Supervisors read this blog and see it as a gauge of public opinion (and because it is uncensored, unlike the Asylum, it is an accurate gauge). Even though there are some who bury their heads in the sand (Emma, Elvis, etc.) and reject all pearls, by allowing to say their piece, we are helping to demonstrate to the public and to our elected officials the futility of their cultivated antipathy and sophomoric ideas about local and federal policy.
As I’ve said, the success of this blog is a big reason why the Board felt they had the “political cover,” and the political support, to do the right thing and abolish the immoral and unconstitutional police provision of the Immigration Resolution.
Although I don’t read every post, I’ve noticed that Moon-howler especially tries to understand where the Anti-Immigrant Lobby is coming from. Lately, she’s been frustrated, because she is finding is that “walls to unity” are the only trick in their repertoire. It has been clear from the start that their entire agenda is predicated on racial division and racial contest. Their own posts continue to demonstrate this to this day. When someone like Moon-howler or Elena dares to challenge their assumptions, they build up another wall, and another and another. This whole deal about who lives in nice neighborhoods is just another way to divide and label people, another directive to hate. This one is based on socio-economic division, but it is no different than rallying people on racial division.
Then, along comes Robb Pearson to challenge their assumptions from a perspective they have rarely confronted, so, they attack him for anything and everything they can come up with. That’s how threatened they are by a man who is brave enough to change his mind. He reminds them of their cowardice.
There is something quite instructive in Robb’s journey. He says he wanted to be more involved in our democracy and ended up being led astray by self-serving and hateful partisans. In today’s politics, of course, the walls are clearly delineated, and many are more devoted to the walls than they are to reaching the kind of collective solutions our government was designed toward. Among the many calamities of the Bush administration, their ruthless partisanship at the expense of our national interest and our national security has been perhaps their most damaging abuse of power. For a while, that’s how Republicans thought they were supposed to behave. Thankfully, that period is coming to a close.
But looking back, we can’t entirely blame those who have been seduced by the Anti-Immigrant Lobby. Our politicians, at the highest level have set the worst possible example in the past 8 years, and essentially set the table for the Anti-Immigrant Lobby to take root.
It is little wonder that Robb, who only began to show interest in politics in 2005 or so, was initially misled about what our democracy is actually about. There were a lot of Americans who lost sight of what democracy was supposed to be about between 2001 and 2005.
Juturna, 20. July 2008, 17:18
Your choice – Asylum or Church. Hmmmm…. which will es_la_lie pick?????
Wow Switching to ad hominem mode so quickly! Guffaw!
I pick the asylum. There’s no pre-conceived dogma there.
Good.
The police…here to protect and serve…themselves and their masters.
No matter how many children have to be placed in danger.
blog.nola.com/updates/2008/07/woman_with_gun_terrorizes_chil.html
Emma,
It must be difficult to harbor so much hate in your heart. I find Mr. Pearsons desire to speak out for sexually abused children quite admirable, or maybe you missed that part, as you scanned, for what you believed could be “used” against him. I hope I never meet you Emma, I mean that sincerely. You hide behind a keyboard, spreading your viciousness, and I wonder, is this how you behave in the real world. I imagine, life must be very lonely for you. Maybe that is what makes you so eager to tear others down. I admire Robb Pearson’s ability to look within, decide to alter his path, and then share with others the reason behind his change of heart. Maybe you have lived your life without ever changing your belief about something, that would make for quite a stagnant life Emma.
Just keeping the peace.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbOcz6oF2q4
That was a very disturbing video Mackie, and I know that law enforcement has a unique responsibility in our social fabric, but behavior like this cannot be condoned. To have power, such as this officer and to abuse it, is awful. Having said that, I believe that Prince William County has exemplary police officers led by an oustanding Police Chief. In this issue, immigration, Chief Deane has been outstanding.
Elena,
Law enforcement may have a ‘unique responsibility’ but it is not to we the people. Police have no responsibility to protect us. The Supreme Court has ruled so. So from where do they derive this ‘unique responsibility’ you say they have? If it’s not from we the people, who has given them this authority? If it is not we the people, then we are not their masters.
Their masters are the ruling class of our society. The police do the bidding of the ruling class, or they can kiss their pensions goodbye. Do you think they would have done what you saw in this video to a golden boy of the ruling class? They would have been too afraid.
If they are the enforcers of the ruling class and the ruling class tries to conscript our children to send them to die in Iran ‘for freedom’, what will the enforcers do to us when we resist? This is their ‘unique responsibility’.
Juturna said:
“Oh for Pete’s sake, if I was starving and living in Mexico with my two kids and husband and my husband came to me and said “honey, I am going to sneak over the border and make some money to pay for food and for education for the kids”, I would say “how many sandwiches do you want me to make you”.
This logic, although compassionate, would also support the acts of any person just trying to ‘help’ their family while also breaking the law. Should homeless people be allowed to steal food and clothing? Should a person be allowed to steal toys for if they didn’t their children wouldn’t have a Christmas? Should your neighbor be allowed to steal your car so that they can travel to a job across town? All motivated only to ‘help’ their families, but where would it end?
SA before logic apply ethics. My statement would have to be changed to eliminate “education” according to the principle of double effect. That eliminates toys, cars and education as ethically supported. Now we are left with just food. So how far apart are we?
Back to logic- are you saying your wife and kids would starve before you would break the law?
SA I neglected to mention (although it was my purpose in responding) that I am looking for a place to start agreement. Just one thought. Then we negotiate.
SA, toys are not FOOD. At least, I’ve always told my children that when they attempted to eat toys.
Emma addresses your sentiments here: “you would think it is “immoral” to control immigration to some degree and to protect U.S. borders, since you seem to think that the U.S. has an unlimited supply of cash to support the tide of the world’s poor.”
It is not immoral to control immigration. It IS immoral to treat the people who are already here like second class citizens, like dirt, and like animals which is what is happening. This is what I personally want stopped.
The U.S. certainly does not have an unlimited supply of cash and most people want immigration controlled in some aspect. Indeed, if we accept too many people (i.e. more people than there are jobs which right now is not the case), then we put our country in jeopardy. We will not be able to accomplish the mission of being generous and prosperous. There must be balance.
There are security risks to open borders. I don’t endorse security risks. However, I don’t endorse enforcement only or violence or the misuse of what some people call justice. I cannot and will not tolerate violation of human rights and outright cruelty.
As a country, since our government chose to break its own laws, we owe it to the people here to rectify the situation fairly. That means, yes, serious criminals must go (real “felons” that is). But at the very least, we must work with those whose visas have expired and who have come here to work. We cannot divide and persecute families. We cannot refuse basic healthcare to our workers. That is as bad as denying people insurance….all people.
Major groups such as the Mayors’ Conference, the League of Women Voters and more are proposing such remedies. They are not advocating a “free ride” by any stretch. They ARE advocating a path to sanity without divisive partisan rhetoric. I think sanity will win out in the end. People, all of us, need peace and security. We can have it, but only if we treat others with respect. There is no such thing as “sending them back with love” as we call them “invaders” and “vermin” and persecute them. That isn’t love. That is using love profanely.
Mackie, there are bad cops everywhere. There are bad people everywhere, people who misuse their authority in the name of justice. We have a Chairman who does this quite often. It’s up to us to remain vigilant.