>>Okay, so I should have written: Can you explain to me why you consider what you might have done if you'd have the chance of low moral value and integrity?
>
>Playing the "what if" game isn't my cup of tea but if I could have tapped his phones .. I would have. If I could have implanted listening devices in his home .. I would have. If I could have hired P.I.s to follow him 24 hours a day .. I would have. If I could have stolen his computer and read everything on it .. I would have. But I don't have the money or the connections to do any of those things.
>
>My point was that when it comes to protecting your children, integrity sometimes goes out the door. Just try to attack a lion's cubs and see what happens ... the same primal instincts apply to human moms!
Cathy, thanks for replying. As I see it, those "what if" behaviors, weighing the context, were of lower moral value and integrity, but not too low. Although a judge in court might decide otherwise.
Groet,
Peter de Valença
Constructive frustration is the breeding ground of genius.
If there’s no willingness to moderate for the sake of good debate, then I have no willingness to debate at all.
Let's develop superb standards that will end the holy wars.
"There are three types of people: Alphas and Betas", said the beta decisively.
If you find this message rude or offensive or stupid, please take a step away from the keyboard and try to think calmly about an eventual a possible alternative explanation of my message.
