Re: Radcliffe bad press
John Peschken (peschken@IX.NETCOM.COM)
Thu, 1 May 1997 19:28:45 -0500
> At 2:24 PM 05/1/97, John Peschken wrote:
> >I think, that as an important figure in a organization that
> >teaching civic responsibility as one of it's principal goals, Mr.
> >Radcliffe should be held to an even higher standard than the
> Excuse me? I think everyone should have the same standard, just as
Okay, I don't have a problem with that.
> To assume that Jere is guilty of a Felony is stating that he had
> intent to do bodily harm.
As I understand it, the law does not require malicious intent.
> How may business CEOs, retired or off-duty
> police, congressmen, "influential people in general" have done the
> honest mistake over the 30+ years of airline travel?
I don't know, but they should suffer whatever consequences the law
> So you think that society should lower the standards for low-income
> and have exceedingly high standards for Jere?
No, I never brought up income. Mr. Radcliffe should be held to a higher
standard because he is an important representative of Scouting. Income
has nothing to do with it.
> What happened to the concept of fairness and treating all men as
> equals? I think it is not Constitutional.
It is not the law that should hold Mr. Radcliffe to a higher standard.
It is Mr. Radcliffe himself. If he does not see fit to do so, the BSA
should hold him to that higher standard. There is no constitutional
right to be a Scout leader.
Maple Grove, Minnesota, USA
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City