Yossarius's Dungeon
Little Cuban Pain-in-my-Ass!

What is it about the word "children" that forces all reason out of people's heads? I mean, if you could get on TV and tell people, "The First Amendment to the Constitution should be repealed, because free speech hurts children!" and back it up with teary eyes and 45 minutes woth of psuedo-Judeao-Christian rhetoric, you would instantly become a write-in canidate for President. What is with that? I don't get it.

That kind of mentality is at the heart of this whole "Elian Gonzales" garbage. Because he is a child, we, as a nation, are obligated to protect him; not his rights, but him. The child's well-being is more important than federal guidelines regarding illegal immigrants, or the rights of a parent, or any other legal or logical issue. It is thinking like this that turns this country a little more against freedom every year.

The fact that he would probably have more advantages in this country than in Cuba is of no consequence here. Children living in the ghetto would probably have more advantages if we stole them from their parents and made rich people raise them, but I don't see the government gearing up to do this any time soon. That would be violating the rights of the parents. This is plainly obvious.

The fact that his mother ate the big one on their little raft while they floated to Florida is also of no consequence. While, yes, if she had the ability to talk to that little kid who sees dead people, she would probably say that she wants her little boy to remain in this country. However, she is, in fact, now worm-food. Therefore, her wishes, even if they were clearly known, as in, being set down in a will, would not supersede the father's rights to his own son. To say say otherwise is to fall back on modern feminist extremist ideology; that women are fundamentally better than men, and thus she knows better than him (upcoming is a page devoted to this very topic).

Furthermore, please stop saying, "His mother died for his freedom!" That's bullshit at its most refined. Grade A Bullshit, if you will. When you die for something, death itself is a choice. You choose death. You realize that your death will accomplish a specific thing, and you choose to make this sacrifice. This woman did not choose death, it was thrust upon her. Her CHOICE was to risk her own life for her own freedom, and, in the process, taking from her son the right to make that choice for himself. As a 5 year-old child, I doubt that she asked him if he wanted to go. I'm sure the decision was make for him. Her choice was to leave Cuba with him before he was old enough to voice an opinion, but old enough to actually be of some help while doing so. Taken a step further, you could easily reason that she risked her life and his for her freedom alone, not for them both. While he might have found freedom in this country, if she had survived the trip, I find it more likely that she was thinking specifically of her own freedom, not her's and her child's. He was brought along because he is her child (feel free to read into that, "her property". Many more parent's think this way than would be willing to admit. Hence the phrase, "Because I said so!")

The boy's family members living in Miami, despite what they or any other latino immigrants (legal or otherwise), or, for that matter, anybody else, may think, do not have rights to the boy that exceed those of the father. This is the reason that courts have said over and over that grandparents do not have legal visitation rights to a child. Our government does not have the legal authority to dictate to a parent, regardless of their legal statis in this country, how they must raise their child. Our government may only take a child from his or her parents when when it can legally prove that the child is being harmed by the parents. Taking Elian back to Cuba does not equate "harm", regardless of any person's political views regarding Fidel Castro, or Cuba in general. Expanding the legal views of harm to include this kind of action opens all kinds of legislative doors that we most definately should not want opened, if we at all treasure what little freedom we have left (this is also an upcoming topic which will be addressed on another page).

And finally, as a minor, Elian does not have the right to seek asylum in this country, even if he knew what it meant (which is not absolutely impossible, if the concept was explained to him in concepts he understood). He doesn't have the right to do so because he is not of autonomous age, which is the age of 18 in most states. In essence, he is not legally old enough to make such decisions for himself. If his father wants to defect to the US, he has every right to do so. If he chooses not to do that, its, "Come along, little boy," and the US government, nor anyone else, for that matter, have no right to stop him.

Thus, all these arguements in mind, what should be done ought to be obvious: we need to take little Elian, and drown him in the Carrabean Sea like his mother, which is what should have happened in the first fucking place! Or else assassinate Castro so that everybody can feel good about sending the little shit back, as well as severely curtailing illegal immegration in Southern Florida, which, as most non-latino residents of Miami would probably agree (behind closed doors, if not in public), has ruined the southern third of Florida anyway (prejudice is another topic that will addressed on another page at another time).


Back to Main