@Intrepid,
Quote:He ended up leaving his overnight with Friend
and walking home at 8:30 yesterday morning
Intrepid wrote:This part certainly needs to be addressed with Mo
OmSigDAVID wrote:He was within his rights, to leave.
He has no duty to be a guest against his will.
David
Intrepid wrote:C'mon, David. I know you have said that you never had children
but you should at least have some common sense.
I know that is a lot to ask, you being a lawyer and all.
Mo is 9 years old. He was not being held against his will.
We
KNOW that from the fact that he successfully left.
Did I allege that he was "held against his will" as u put it ??
Intrepid wrote:He was in a safe place that was endorsed by his mother.
I am not saying he should have stayed,
I am saying he should not have left without the knowledge and consent of his mother.
That is an
INSULT to Mo.
I obviously have more respect for him than u do.
How 'd u respond if Mo said the same thing about U,
if the circumstances were reversed, Richard ?
U 'd judge his mind to be
far inferior to yours
because he is younger and u have contempt for the young.
Mo might not
JOIN u, in your opinion of contempt for him.
I don 't.
When I was 9, in those circumstances I certainly woud have done
exactly the same thing that Mo did. I
admire his independence
and his willingness to autonomously control an unwelcome situation.
He may be 9 years old, but he acted like
a MAN. He was
brave.
(I guess at his age, u 'd have been a wimp, Richard?
I hope that u 'll tell me that I 'm mistaken and u 'd have done the same as he did.)
Mo showed his true
character, which, predictably will only get stronger as he ages.
In a little way, he was a hero, standing up for what he believed, to wit:
hitting the road.
U must understand, Richard, that Mo is a 9 year old
AMERICAN,
whereas u were only a Canadian.
Intrepid wrote:THAT is what needed to be addressed with him.
Well, it may have been a newsworthy event,
depending on the reason for his chosen departure.
Apparently, his trip was within walking distance.
OmSigDAVID wrote:Next you will be saying that he should have had a gun to protect himself
against the bad guys he may have encountered.
Every predatory event, with man or beast, is a
contest of
power.
I want the
victim to win,
whereas U want the victim to be
helpless. I reject that.
When I was that age, I rejected it. I have never changed my mind.
On the other hand, u and others take a less masculine point of vu.
Mo was
Intrepid.
" in·trep·id
–adjective
resolutely fearless; dauntless: an intrepid explorer. "
At his age, were u trepid, Richard ?
David
