And some “Angel” families, families that have lost loved ones in similar circumstances says that vital issues should be spoke of concerning the security of our country.
Sandi Tibbetts Murphy expressed her desire to “reclaim our Mollie” from those using her as part of their “racist, false narrative.”…
But Murphy said those casting blame should instead focus on the accused killer’s “sense of male entitlement.”
Wow. This one is batty. Unfortunately her line of ‘thinking’ resonates with a lot of people. We are doomed.
I have well over 20 cousins, none of them speak for my family.
I also am more interested in what her parents and siblings think about it.
In the article in the link, the cousin mentions race (used the word “racist”) and the aunt mentions color.
I agree that it would be wrong if someone said "Mexicans . . . " or "Hispanics . . . " or "Latinos . . . "
But we have every right to make legitimate policy arguments.
Such as: “Illegal immigrants have committed crimes against American citizens (or killed American citizens in traffic accidents). For example, in the Mollie Tibbetts case . . . [and there are many others like it]. If the illegals had not been here these Americans would not have been killed. Therefore, I oppose illegal immigration.”
Thanks for posting this.
And, seriously, even if they did commit fewer crimes than citizens it wouldn’t matter to me; I’d still want the borders enforced.
If that particular individual had been deported the murder wouldn’t have happened. Period. Whatever the statistics say. And our first priority should be to maintain the safety of our citizens, not to help illegals.
Maybe if we stop calling the “illegal immigrants” and start calling them “guns” we can get libs to care about background checking them…
What makes you think that your policy argument ins legitimate?
It pivots the policy question to opposition to illegal immigration - a matter on which agreement is essentially 100% - to the methods of enforcement - a matter on which there is serious debate.
And is otherwise lacking substance. Consider this argument: Norwegian (to use Trump’s privileged group) immigrants have committed crimes. If they were not here, then these crimes would not have been committed. Therefore, i oppose Norwegian immigration.
Not a lot going on there.
I feel terrible for her for losing her cousin, but she seems inconsistent and nuts as to not even be worth discussing. She’s worried about perpetuating racial stereotypes but has no issue rambling on about male entitlement? If she had said we don’t want this used for anything political or to send any message, I could understand that period but she’s fine with that it’s just that she selective in which demographic she uses her cousin’s death to target.
Do you really think that a crime of this nature has nothing to do with “male entitlement?”
Seems to me it has quite a bit more to do with male entitlement than ethnicity or immigration status.
This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.