"...jimpit, but you must realise the implications that
your agreeance with Dersh will have on the powers of the
govt. to enforce laws and the ability of children to defy
their parents(that is one take)..."
You're an attorney, isn't that happening already?
I suspect much of the hoopla is frivolous, but, some must
truly benefit children at risk.
"...Another take is jimit, you must realise that Dersh
will decrease the powers of an oppressive federal govt..."
LOL... And you think that's BAD?
"... and grant children the powers all adults take for granted..."
Does not some obscure part of the Articles of Confederation read:
"We the people..." not, "We the adults..."?
"...Either way, it is easy to jsut think of this issue in
terms of a Cuban boy. But Dersh's position, if accepted,
would not just apply to refugees. It would dramatically
alter the face of American jurisprudence..."
Umm... OK. And...?
"...You may agree with Dersh on this issue, but
considering that you have never before agreed with Dersh,
I doubt very much that you would appreciate the changes
that would be obligatory..."
Not only are you misquoting me, you are presuming to think
for me. Typical of the "...we know what's best for you..."
socialist elite establishment that is the Clinton
Administration.
"...BTW, who will choose this lawyer?"
I don't presume to know what the process should be to ensure
a fair (to Elian) choice.
I can only tell you who I think should NOT influence the
selection. But, then, I think you should already know
that. |
