Or are you going to deny saying this now?
Yeah, I got a little ahead of myself there. I should have said that it would be more likely to run into a person like that. I don’t think that every single pro bono client is a “n’er-do-well miscreant.” The real point of what I was trying to express there is that I don’t want to be in the position of meeting a complete asshole in a situation where I’m supposed to fix the asshole’s problems. That doesn’t sound fun to me.
Holy shit. It all makes sense now.
Yep, people rich enough to afford his services are by definition not assholes.
:smack:
Responses of “Your arguments are stupid and you’re an idiot” isn’t a “response”- especially from someone with a law degree- to any of the many sensible or reasonable arguments put forth by posters in this thread that aren’t you.
For the first time since posting here I’ve reported a post (the earlier one) because you couldn’t admit your mistake. Misquoting people (which is exactly what you did) is really very low.
I know that was your “answer.” But it is an “answer” based on the flawed argument you have made the entire time - that simply because there is no sanction (something I deny by the way), acting ethically in IL does not require aspiring to do pro bono. This is wrong, and you lying on the floor, pounding your feet and fists, and threatening to hold your breath till you are blue in the face doesn’t change that.
What you have done isn’t argument. Claiming an issue has been decided doesn’t actually mean an issue has been decided. You’ve been (surprise, surprise) fundamentally intellectually dishonest. And that’s why I gave up arguing with you about it.
Villa, the problem here is you are not understanding the difference between an actual obligation and a moral obligation. You thin doing pro bono is a moral obligation, which is fine, but you then make the leap to it being an actual obligation, which is simply not true (because aspiring to do pro bono isn’t necessary to comply with the rules, which is all a lawyer swears to do by taking the oath).
Yawns.
Stated another way, I have no quarrel with you stating that I am acting unethically or immorally. What bothers me is when you make the leap to saying that I’m not doing something I swore to do. All I swore to do was to abide by the rules, and I’ve done that.
Do you aspire to do pro bono work, yes or no?
You don’t have to take a potential Pro Bono client if you don’t want to, right?
Couldn’t you pick and chose? How about only offering Pro Bono services to the winner of the First Annual Rand Rover “Atlas Shrugged” essay contest, to the contestant who best exemplifies Objectivist values?
Prr, the answer is no (as should be apparent by now).
No, the problem is that you do not understand that a moral obligation IS an actual obligation. As a sociopath, you are incapable of recognizing that.
As to your claim to swearing and to following the rules, did you or did you not sign an application form for bar membership incorporating, by reference, the professional responsibilities ensuing therefrom and the documents explaining them?
I’m wondering, why don’t you aspire to help anybody?
If you looked hard enough for worthy people to help, do you literally think that there’s nobody who is worthy of your aid? No John Galt type who wants to start a business, but is being eaten alive by taxes? Who shows great promise, but who can’t (at least at the moment) afford to pay a 300 dollar an hour fee?
See, now you are just getting desperate for some kind of victory, but it doesn’t have to be that way.
That’s my whole point. We should let others have different opinions than ours without shaming, name-calling or threatening.
We were talking about your hate for others who don’t follow your ideals because it makes you look bad (before you tried to change the subject). Its OK if you don’t wanna talk about it, but I hope you find peace.
Rand Rover, I know there is good within you, despite your icy cold objectivist exterior. Come to the light side! Be the first person in SDMB history to argue a point for 1,500 posts, and change his mind after the enormous weight of reason becomes too much to bear! Restore our faith in humanity!
RR, this may sound like New Agey crap could you try a guided meditation for me? Close your eyes, and for 5 minutes, imagine what it would feel like to actually help someone.
No, you simply did not follow a rule of this forum; that is, you are not allowed to quote a poster, and then alter the poster’s quotes in any respect. You removed words in quoted text. This is against the rules.
You lying sack of shit. My post talked about hating three situations where people’s actions affected me. I did not talk of hating the people.
Why am I surprised that someone willing to misquote will then make up what people have supposedly said?
And I was talking to you about pitfalls of forcing people to do voluntary/charity work. So, do you agree with me or should we agree to disagree?