|
another problem is that many of the responses to your question, cyn, respond by implicitly saying your scenario is not good so far as they are concerned. over and over there are suggestions about other places where expenditures would be cut and the money used. you don't seem to want to recognize these as responses, for whatever reason, so you say they aren't responses. beneath this is a *political* evaluation about the matter of whether rape is a serious enough crime that ancillary servicese which are made available are worthwhile public expenditures, enough so that confronted with a scenario like yours, they *would not* make the same choice as you seem willing to make.
that's the problem.
i think alot of folk--myself included--are not willing to agree with what either is or appears to be a judgment that rape is less that serious which *has* to be in place for your conclusion to follow.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|