Sunday, August 8, 2010
Injustice??
The Belleville News Democrat today, printed a letter from Robert P. Edwards in Granite City, purporting that Small Victories is being targeted for harassment by the police in Granite City for parking illegally.
Here is the letter in it's entirety.
http://www.bnd.com/2010/08/08/1356207/letters-88.html#ixzz0w14TRyxZ
It is reprinted below as well.
Let's take a good look at this letter, shall we?
"Apparently, at times, the Small Victories ultrasound van parks in no-parking areas and receives a ticket for doing so. Understand, the directors of this ministry, Angela and Daniel Michael, don't deny that these transgressions have taken place. However, other vehicles so parked are never targeted. In other words, only the pro-lifers get a ticket."
1. The directors don't deny they have parked illegally.
Okay, that makes this justice rather than injustice. No harassment here. Perhaps no one else gets a ticket because no one else is illegally parked.
2. "other vehicles are never targeted."
Really? Has Mr. Edwards actually witnessed this?
If not, he is operating from a position of hearsay.
Hearsay is inadmissible in court as testimony.
How does Mr. Edwards know this is true?
Has he checked the court records to verify it?
They are public documents open for all the public to view.
Can Mr. Edwards, Mr. or Mrs. Michael or anyone at Small Victories provide cold hard evidence of this "fact"?
If so they should do it right away. To avoid further harassment.
3."In other words, only the pro-lifers get a ticket."
Again how does he know this, has he witnessed it.
How many other pro lifers are getting tickets here?
I am issuing a challenge to all pro lifers, that have gotten a parking ticket in the last 90 days, while protesting in front of Hope Clinic or being parked near or around it and the hospital to send in copies of your parking tickets as proof of this fact.
If Mr. Edwards means only SMALL VICTORIES gets a ticket, then that is a very different thing. Only Small Victories was illegally parked, and they don't deny it, so only they deserved a ticket.
If others were illegally parked, how does he know they did not get a ticket?
Again, witness to, or repeating hearsay about the incident?
Now why would the leaders of Small Victories lie about something like this?
Well, who has the most to benefit from the lie?
Small Victories.
They benefit in sympathy, and potential donations to help them pay the unjust fees and fines.
If they are justly targeted for parking illegally, then there is no sympathy to be gained.
Is there more benefit in admitting that you and many others have justly gotten tickets?
Or is there more benefit in saying, "we and only we were targeted unjustly and this is harassment because we do so much good work? "
4 .."Without question, if the police are going to enforce the law, it must be enforced equally. To not do so is a grievous abuse of power. "
Again, can Mr. Edwards prove that the law is being enforced unequally?
Just the word of one witness (Small Victories) that has the most to gain, is not enough to prosecute this.
Either prove the case with facts or let it lie.
5. As a resident of Granite City, it infuriates me to think that my tax dollars could be going to administer injustice.
Mr. Edwards has not proven that there is any injustice at all.
As a matter of fact, if anything he has proven that the tickets were deserved and should have been rightfully written and received.
It is this authors opinion that Small Victories prefers to live a life of drama and imagined pain, they make others believe it is persecution rather than prosecution. Because it furthers their need for attention, and sympathy.
There is no prosecutorial misconduct here.
They park illegally and they get tickets, as do many others in Granite City. That is justice.
To hear Small Victories tell the tale, the Granite City Police have a ticket book with their name and license number pre-printed on every ticket, just waiting for Small Victories to arrive in town to be used.
The reality is that the Granite City Police would love to have a week where their name did not come up, or Small Victories caller ID did not appear on their screen.
Perhaps if they would arrive at the clinic earlier, and be more careful how they parked, they would not get so many tickets.
But then how would they get the sympathy of their adoring public, if there were no righteous indignation to be gained?
Here is the letter in it's entirety.
http://www.bnd.com/2010/08/08/1356207/letters-88.html#ixzz0w14TRyxZ
It is reprinted below as well.
Let's take a good look at this letter, shall we?
"Apparently, at times, the Small Victories ultrasound van parks in no-parking areas and receives a ticket for doing so. Understand, the directors of this ministry, Angela and Daniel Michael, don't deny that these transgressions have taken place. However, other vehicles so parked are never targeted. In other words, only the pro-lifers get a ticket."
1. The directors don't deny they have parked illegally.
Okay, that makes this justice rather than injustice. No harassment here. Perhaps no one else gets a ticket because no one else is illegally parked.
2. "other vehicles are never targeted."
Really? Has Mr. Edwards actually witnessed this?
If not, he is operating from a position of hearsay.
Hearsay is inadmissible in court as testimony.
How does Mr. Edwards know this is true?
Has he checked the court records to verify it?
They are public documents open for all the public to view.
Can Mr. Edwards, Mr. or Mrs. Michael or anyone at Small Victories provide cold hard evidence of this "fact"?
If so they should do it right away. To avoid further harassment.
3."In other words, only the pro-lifers get a ticket."
Again how does he know this, has he witnessed it.
How many other pro lifers are getting tickets here?
I am issuing a challenge to all pro lifers, that have gotten a parking ticket in the last 90 days, while protesting in front of Hope Clinic or being parked near or around it and the hospital to send in copies of your parking tickets as proof of this fact.
If Mr. Edwards means only SMALL VICTORIES gets a ticket, then that is a very different thing. Only Small Victories was illegally parked, and they don't deny it, so only they deserved a ticket.
If others were illegally parked, how does he know they did not get a ticket?
Again, witness to, or repeating hearsay about the incident?
Now why would the leaders of Small Victories lie about something like this?
Well, who has the most to benefit from the lie?
Small Victories.
They benefit in sympathy, and potential donations to help them pay the unjust fees and fines.
If they are justly targeted for parking illegally, then there is no sympathy to be gained.
Is there more benefit in admitting that you and many others have justly gotten tickets?
Or is there more benefit in saying, "we and only we were targeted unjustly and this is harassment because we do so much good work? "
4 .."Without question, if the police are going to enforce the law, it must be enforced equally. To not do so is a grievous abuse of power. "
Again, can Mr. Edwards prove that the law is being enforced unequally?
Just the word of one witness (Small Victories) that has the most to gain, is not enough to prosecute this.
Either prove the case with facts or let it lie.
5. As a resident of Granite City, it infuriates me to think that my tax dollars could be going to administer injustice.
Mr. Edwards has not proven that there is any injustice at all.
As a matter of fact, if anything he has proven that the tickets were deserved and should have been rightfully written and received.
It is this authors opinion that Small Victories prefers to live a life of drama and imagined pain, they make others believe it is persecution rather than prosecution. Because it furthers their need for attention, and sympathy.
There is no prosecutorial misconduct here.
They park illegally and they get tickets, as do many others in Granite City. That is justice.
To hear Small Victories tell the tale, the Granite City Police have a ticket book with their name and license number pre-printed on every ticket, just waiting for Small Victories to arrive in town to be used.
The reality is that the Granite City Police would love to have a week where their name did not come up, or Small Victories caller ID did not appear on their screen.
Perhaps if they would arrive at the clinic earlier, and be more careful how they parked, they would not get so many tickets.
But then how would they get the sympathy of their adoring public, if there were no righteous indignation to be gained?
Target of the police?
I've been informed, and I believe, that the Granite City Police Department is being used to harass a longstanding pro-life ministry that has, for years, been the last chance for babies on their way to extermination in our local embarrassment, the Hope Clinic for Women.
Apparently, at times, the Small Victories ultrasound van parks in no-parking areas and receives a ticket for doing so. Understand, the directors of this ministry, Angela and Daniel Michael, don't deny that these transgressions have taken place. However, other vehicles so parked are never targeted. In other words, only the pro-lifers get a ticket.
As a resident of Granite City, it infuriates me to think that my tax dollars could be going to administer injustice. Without question, if the police are going to enforce the law, it must be enforced equally. To not do so is a grievous abuse of power.
At the very least these allegations need to be investigated and, if found to be true, a personnel change is in order.
Robert P. Edwards
Granite City
Friday, August 6, 2010
Clarification as to Divorce
I would like to take this opportunity to clarify something from the website.
The Questions being raised about fact that the President of Small Victories has been divorced and remarried are not a comment about the idea of divorce, but rather a comment on the fact that she has continuously used the very fact that others have been divorced and remarried as weapon against them, to run them off and hurt them, as well as make them look bad in the public eye.
All the while hiding the fact that she herself is guilty of these things, and ignoring the fact that if being divorced and remarried disqualifies others from service to God, and from standing in front of an abortion clinic convincing women from having an abortion. It also disqualifies herself.
She equally hides this fact from those in authority, that would consider it a disqualifying factor in their decision to make donations to Small Victories. One has to ask why?
The leaders of Small Victories are quick to point out the hypocrisy of others in the pro-life movement, even citing Jesus' statement about ignoring the log in your own eye as you point out the speck in your brother's eye.
So with this in mind, how can she in good conscience accuse others of adultery, knowing that she herself is guilty of it according to her own standard?
In this author's opinion, this is exactly what Jesus was talking about when he said that every man would be judged according to his own his deeds. Matthew 16:27
What right does the leadership of Small Victories have to point out the sins of others, when they do not admit or accept that they are sinners themselves?
The Questions being raised about fact that the President of Small Victories has been divorced and remarried are not a comment about the idea of divorce, but rather a comment on the fact that she has continuously used the very fact that others have been divorced and remarried as weapon against them, to run them off and hurt them, as well as make them look bad in the public eye.
All the while hiding the fact that she herself is guilty of these things, and ignoring the fact that if being divorced and remarried disqualifies others from service to God, and from standing in front of an abortion clinic convincing women from having an abortion. It also disqualifies herself.
She equally hides this fact from those in authority, that would consider it a disqualifying factor in their decision to make donations to Small Victories. One has to ask why?
The leaders of Small Victories are quick to point out the hypocrisy of others in the pro-life movement, even citing Jesus' statement about ignoring the log in your own eye as you point out the speck in your brother's eye.
So with this in mind, how can she in good conscience accuse others of adultery, knowing that she herself is guilty of it according to her own standard?
In this author's opinion, this is exactly what Jesus was talking about when he said that every man would be judged according to his own his deeds. Matthew 16:27
What right does the leadership of Small Victories have to point out the sins of others, when they do not admit or accept that they are sinners themselves?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)