Quote:
Originally Posted by angryssg
That's not fair. You do not have to agree with me, but to allude to something that drastic, even though it is sarcasim, is harsh. I know that what I am saying seems cruel, but the lockup that I am refering to is not as cruel as you guys may think. Think of it as more of a minimum security place or a guarded homless shelter.
The only difference is that we are essentially forcing them to make something of themselves. IMO that is alot better than letting them suffer with a needle in their arms, a bottle in their hands, and a newspaper on their backs as we walk by them on a daily basis without even acknowledging their existance.
Call it intervention, call it whatever you want to, but do not just assume that I want the homeless all dead. I want them all helped. You do not agree with my methods. OK, my feeling are not hurt. But, never assume that I think that certain people are not worthy of existence.
Maybe it is the former military in me. We do not let our people fail, we force them to suceed.
|
You're right. That was unfair, and harsh. I am sorry. Some of my frustration with the Belichick thread made it's way here.
It would be nice to force the homeless to succeed, but it's their prerogative to be homeless, IMO. I'm sure there are plenty of people who are happy being homeless.