Unethical Quote Of The Month: Simon Radecki

“You probably haven’t seen the news. Can you confirm whether or not your daughter Bridget has been kidnapped?”

–Pennsylvanian Simon Radecki of Northampton County, asking Senator Pat Toomey a question at a public town hall relating to the President’s decision to suspend the DACA.

It’s seldom one sees a deliberate breach of question and answer ethics from a member of the public (journalists breach these all the time, but they also are held to higher standards).Radecki’s question to the Senator qualifies, and is about as odious as the breed gets.

To begin with, the question was framed as a lie, suggesting that there was any report to confirm. It was also vicious, an intentional infliction of emotional distress (a tort), a plausible threat, and a direct Golden Rule breach. Nobody would want to have someone falsely report that his daughter was the victim of a crime or in mortal danger, yet this is exactly what Radecki did to Toomey. To add to the question’s unethical pedigree, Radecki dragged Toomey’s innocent 16-year-old daughter ( Ivanka Trump-hate  notwithstanding, being the child of a Republican is not yet a crime)  into a political controversy, exploiting her and employing her as a tool of partisan attack.


It was also an incompetent question: stupid, illogical, and ignorant, attempting an illegitimate analogy as well as employing on of my least favorite arguments, the “how would you feel if it was your loved one?” gotcha, a line of attack that suggests that policy decisions are better made with biases and conflicts of interest than without them. Indeed, the implication that deporting an illegal immigrant is in any way like kidnapping is so idiotic that it is signature significance for someone no sentient citizen should choose to listen to as long as there is an escape route. I don’t even want to know how Radecki arrives at the conclusion that his question makes any sense at all, beyond “Think of the children!” at its bottom, slug-level worst. His question, in addition to being cruel, dishonest and disgusting, is so stupid that it risks the brain cells of anyone who reads it or hears it.

Radecki was kicked out of the forum, as he should have been, for violating basic standards or decorum, civility and decency.  Bethlehem police, however, arrested him, and  may bring charges against him for disorderly conduct and disrupting a public meeting. Wrong. He’s an idiot, and Hanlon’s Razor applies: authorities should presume stupidity rather than malice, especially when freedom speech is involved.


Filed under "bias makes you stupid", Childhood and children, Ethics Alarms Award Nominee, Ethics Quotes, Etiquette and manners, Family, Government & Politics, Law & Law Enforcement, Rights, U.S. Society

9 responses to “Unethical Quote Of The Month: Simon Radecki

  1. Rusty Rebar

    Yeah, I think you are right on with this one. It was a stupid thing to say, on several levels, but it was also protected speech. He was not inciting, and when it comes down to it, you get to say what you want in this country, with few exceptions. Since when is free speech so hard to figure out? This is not rocket science.

  2. Chris

    Absolutely correct.

  3. I think you’re probably correct Jack, but I’m not going to judge Simon or the police until I get more information. Is there video of what took place, all of it?

  4. Radecki is a total tool for making his point this way and causing undue emotional distress. That being said…

    “the implication that deporting an illegal immigrant is in any way like kidnapping is so idiotic that it is signature significance for someone”

    You make this claim, but you offer no argument or defense of it. So, here, let me help by explaining the distinction between kidnapping and deportation: In a kidnapping, violent strangers capture someone and take them away from their friends and family. In a deportation, violent strangers with badges capture someone and take them away from their friends and family. This is why people who are being kidnapped should feel isolated and terrified, whereas people who are being deported should shut up and quit their whining.

    • The same could be said of any arrest. You are arguing against the notion of any valid law enforcement.

      • I am arguing that kidnapping and deportation (or arrest) are pretty similar to the people they happen to. Obviously, there is more danger and uncertainty with kidnapping than with cops, but it’s still a similar experience of being restrained by strangers and dragged away, and it still breaks up families. This is not an argument against all law enforcement. It is an argument that arrest and deportation involves putting the people arrested and deported through some very difficult times, so we should be sure that we’re doing it for a good reason. If Senator Pat Toomey supports the deportation of 800,000 people by revoking DACA, he needs to justify ripping apart 800,000 families.

    • Michelle Klatt

      This is an illogical comparison. In a kidnapping, an innocent person is taken against their will, and used for illegal purposes, i.e. ransom, assault, etc.
      In deportation, a guilty person is taken against their will, and used for legal purposes. “Violent strangers with badges” really means law enforcement. People who are hired to enforce the law. The vast majority of law enforcement is not violent, and this is nothing more than smoke and mirrors to make no logical point.

      • The logical point I’m trying to make is that deporting someone is pretty similar to kidnapping someone in terms of the harm it does to the people it happens to. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it. But it does mean we have to justify it. Locking people in cages is a terrible thing to do, but we throw rapists in prison anyway, not because caging them is less harmful, but despite the fact that it’s harmful. We shouldn’t close our eyes to that. We justify caging rapists as being necessary to prevent them from re-offending and as a means to deter others from committing that crime. The same goes for deportation. You may be able to justify it, but it’s intellectually dishonest to pretend it isn’t going to harm anyone.

  5. …deportation. You may be able to justify it, but it’s intellectually dishonest to pretend it isn’t going to harm anyone.

    Who claimed it would not be harmful? Is this a straw man you made up, or did someone actually say it. I am not being snarky, just have never heard someone make this claim.

    Past that point, why do we care if it harms a criminal to deliver justice? Another non-snarky question. This ranges from the death penalty down to loss of work hours due to jay walking. If I choose to speed, I have to deal with the consequences of being caught. I am an adult, and understand that this is part of my responsible use of a vehicle on public roads. Why are illegals different?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.