Back to the main page of The Epistolizer

Comment List

Normaly I would agree answer a question if you might, did he hang out for unreasonable lengths of time? Had he been watching her for a while before giving her the love letter? thus causing everyone to go into a panic thinking the bank was being robbed. It might not have been his general appearance that was found offensive, perhaps more of his method Be blessed 2005-12-24 10:48:45 Posted by Ross ()

I feel sad for this man, although the paranoia of the state is something to find both amusing and alarming. Not knowing the full details of what was seeming to go through the minds of the authorities or this man, I cannot know for certain which side of this issue to stand upon. There are two sides to this story, to be sure. Which has merit over the other is purely a matter of judgement and personal inclination to choose between liberty and security. I tend to choose liberty, but understand the need for security. As Benjamin Franklin said: "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." I don't think that this falls under what Old Ben was talking about, however, since I do not agree that any person should be able to use liberty to force their expression upon another and thereby abridge the targeted person's own liberties. Nonetheless, I appreciate your candor in sharing this thought. In Christ, Mel BTW, Merry Christmas... 2005-12-24 13:24:01 Posted by Mel ()

I did read the link on Yahoo, and that still does not lead me to stand for this seemingly confused young man who's personal distress caused him to take a somewhat unique approach. I think it caused consternation that was reasonable, even if possibly overly prudent on the part of the obeject of his affection. For the state to levy that award, well I did not she her face, or feel her fear. Was it real? I think that is the matter to consider. Was it reasonable? That is another consideration, and in the depths of depravity that we see exhibited more and more in all societies, I would answer that it was not entirely unreasonable. I think the quote from the young man is illuminating: "I don't really think I did anything wrong, but it was my fault it happened, and I had to plead guilty really for her sake." I think he understands her unanticipated paranoia, and chose the right action, turning the other cheek, so to speak. Mel 2005-12-24 13:39:04 Posted by Mel ()

Love - it's as simple as that. Don't let the world block out the importance of the intention behind his actions. The public against this scottish man, the world against Jesus - what's the difference? God Bless and have a very Merry Christmas 2005-12-25 12:15:19 Posted by Lee ()

Lee, if I was convinced that it was love, I would have outright agreed with the proposition that the state was entirely wrong in what they did. I saw it, at best, as what I would call 'innocent infatuation'. By that I mean that he had not demonstrated anything truly dangerous, even if his behavior bordered on what most would define as 'stalking'. But neither did he have enough of an established relationship with the woman he worried by his unusual actions to validate his right to such a method of approaching her. If the truth is that he did not know where she lived, the proper thing would have been to ask her, not trail her like some flatfoot on the job. If he really had a legitimate need to know where she lived but had compelling reasons (not just that he was too shy) to not just ask, his actions would have been entirely appropriate. I can't find a way to think that could be the case. The more I think about this, the less I think the state overstepped its bounds. In fact, I begin to feel more like they were being properly prudent. In Christ, Mel 2005-12-30 21:59:28 Posted by Mel ()

Ok, for sport I tried to think of a situation where I'd say that trailing the young lady to her house would be "in bounds", so to say. Situation: Young man is alone at a Pub (in itself, this might be bad) sitting at a table, and he has just gotten a pint to enjoy while watching some of the other regulars play a game of darts. (please excuse the stereotyping here, if you want to change certain details to fit your own mindset, I am sure that they could work as well...) Anyways, he is nursing his drink, not over consuming and becoming drunk, and this young lass sits down and chats him up a bit. In the course of the passing time, she notices what time it has become and says she has to bustle off. The young man, feeling the effect of the half of his pint he has already drunk, says he needs to go to the bathroom, please wait. She hurriedly writes her phone number on a coaster, and gets up quickly, leaning somewhat back towards him and clearly says, 'Call me.' With that, she hurries towards the door. He really has to go, so he runs into the head, relieves himself quickly, and comes out to find that the staff has already bussed off his table, along with the coaster and the phone number. He looks about frantically for a second, and quick with his wits, he dashes out the door and scans for the young lass. He sees her off down the row a bit, and because his auto is nearby, his hops in and drives towards her. Just before he gets to her, he sees her pull out in her car, and follows, closely at first, but falling farther back as he begins to think about what he is doing. He follows her well enough to see where she was going, not knowing if it is her place or not, and drives back to the pub. There he searches fruitlessly through a bunch of garbage to find that number, and sits down and thinks some more. He decides to case out this place, and determine whather or not she lives there. She does seem to, so he writes a letter and slips it under the door, a rather quaint presentation of the story of how he lost her number and could not find it. Now in this case, I'd say that the man has a standing to take such actions, based upon the invitation to "Call me." Yes, he was doing more than calling, but circumstances gave rise to a situation where he could not simply limit himself to that. Can you see the difference? In Love, Mel 2005-12-31 14:59:40 Posted by Mel ()

Makes perfect sense Mel - I just thought I'd try and get a message through - obviously I'm not good at it! 2005-12-31 16:51:27 Posted by Lee ()

I don't think you failed! I would rather have someone make an error to impune love in this world than to say that there is none! I am being too pragmatic, quite possibly... In Love Again, Mel 2006-01-01 12:17:57 Posted by Mel ()

You must be logged in to leave a comment.

Back to the main page of The Epistolizer