Politics has become a game of “take no survivors”, a game I find very discouraging when critical issues must be resolved between differing parties. The Rural Crescent, since its inception, has been a unique tool, not just for land use, but an opportunity to bring Republicans, Democrats, and Independents together, united together, even if only on one issue. For me, the RC is a tenuous bridge builder between people from different ideological perspectives.
What Peter Candland has demonstrated is a complete and utter lack of understanding of why land use can be the one issue that brings people together. Does Peter Candland prefer to make enemies? Does Peter Candland prefer to just dismiss people who he believes are Democrats? Honestly, I am shocked. Isn’t democracy based on differing views? If everyone believed the same or were bullied into silence, would that be a representation of the Democracy our founding fathers created?
The purpose of the pledge is to allow the community to clearly understand where the candidate stands regarding his or her commitment to the Rural Crescent. Space is provided for clarification, should the candidate care to elaborate. All communication with candidates is posted on the ARC website. The pledge sheet only contains two components:
- Vote to support the Rural Crescent’s current 10 acre minimum residential zoning.
- Oppose the expansion of sewer within the borders of the Rural Crescent as outlined in the current Prince William County Comprehensive Plan.
As anyone can see, those are the only 2 items to support. There is no hidden agenda and there is absolutely nothing about abortion or immigration, legal or illegal, in anything having to do with Rural Crescent affairs.
