From: Bill Lucy 

In article ,
rgparker{at}west.net says...
MPG.1376a66995dd04fd9897fc{at}news.barkto.com>, note these cogitations
> from blucy{at}mediaone.net Bill Lucy:
> > I never deny that I am partisan on some issues. This is definitely not one
of
> > them. It's a "family values" issue turned 180 degrees
out of phase by the
> > addition of a simple variable. I find that interesting.
>
> But what is that simple variable? I think it is freedom.

The variable is a boy. Freedom is too abstract, and not a given in either
"phase".

> My problem with this case is that there is more than one value at stake
> for the kid. If he stays here and his father doesn't he loses something.
> If he goes back to Cuba he loses something (though he gets to spend
> about 6 years with Dad).

I agree with that assessment, with a caveat. It seems to me that one does
not "lose" their parent in Cuba. Look at the situation with Juan
Miguel's parents and Elizabeth Broton's parents. They were still around,
even to the point of taking care of Elian.

> But what I object to in this whole debate are the people who take the
> position that there's really nothing more stake here besides family
> values. That is so obviously not the case that I begin to think that
> some people here (as if I didn't suspect it already) don't really value
> freedom all that much.

Wow. In a previous message, you were saying I delegitimized a position
based on "Clinton/Reno haters". Now, you try to deligitimize my
position (which I wholeheartedly ascribe to) on family.

Thanks, Randall.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5