Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : About that Cuban boy, Elian -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jimpit who wrote (3507)	4/29/2000 10:27:00 AM
From: lawdog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9127

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). Another take is jimit, you must realise that Dersh will decrease the powers of an oppressive federal govt. and grant children the powers all adults take for granted. 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. 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. Just interjecting a comment. BTW, who will choose this lawyer?

To: jimpit who wrote (3507)	4/29/2000 10:49:00 AM
From: X Y Zebra	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9127

Elian surely needs HIS OWN representation. Well... Would that mean that every child potentially could have a representative in the eyes of the law ? Where does one draw the line ? If parents have certain obligations to educate their children, how could such obligations be met if, in the eyes of a legal representative, invade the child's "rights" ? Perhaps you have some ideas, I would like to hear them.

To: jimpit who wrote (3507)	4/29/2000 10:57:00 AM
From: Les H	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9127

I agree with him. If any child runs away from home, child welfare agencies would get involved and investigate the domestic situation(s) that caused the child to leave. The burden of proof should rest on the two parties to show that the return of the child to either household would be beneficial to the child.

To: jimpit who wrote (3507)	4/29/2000 12:45:00 PM
From: chalu2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9127

>>No one has made a determination as to whether Elian's best interests would be served by his return to Cuba with his father or by remaining in the United States."<< Dershowitz is dead wrong. Elian's father has made that determination--parents decide these things for children. It is not the place of either the U.S. government to do this, or a court-appointed U.S. lawyer. How can Dershowitz regard the boy's father as "no one." I also would hesitate to quote a moral authority such as Dershowitz, who bears partial responsibility for the acquittal of double-murderer O.J. Simpson.