OT: Insightful (re: Amish shooting)

[dmm]

I would have jumped all over Mephisto's misuse (IMHO) of the Declaration of Independence to justify his blanket rejection of the death penalty, but RonGianti beat me to it. (Not that M.'s not entitled to his opinion.)

But to go back to the (OT) topic: The NYTimes editorial is "spot on," as the Brits say, in describing the problem at the symptomatic level, but he errs in identifying the root issue. The core problem is not lack of equality for women, nor is it hatred of women. It is not even the sexualization and objectification of women and girls (and boys). The core problem is that everyone is being taught that there is no absolute right or wrong, that there is no moral standard by which behavior should be judged, and that there is no God who will hold them accountable for every deed done in secret. Without these things, morality becomes strictly a matter of opinion, with nobody's opinion being any better than anyone else's, including the opinions of rapists, child molesters, serial killers, and porn merchants.

[Phoenix-D]

Side note: I always find it amusing how some people will lump porn and gay people in with mass murders.

dmm: Some of the largest mass murders in recent years have been conducted by religious people, so I really don't see how that flies.

[Atrocities]

In todays America, mom and dad and the morals that they are responsible for enbedding into their children have been replaced by TV, music, video games, and the internet.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

Phoenix-D:

Where do you see homosexuals mentioned?

Soviet Russia was Athiest. Now, how about we stop that track before it gets out of hand?

[Phoenix-D]

narf: people in general, not in this thread. And to complete the opposite effect Hitler was..nominally Christian.

When people start insinuating that I have no morals, and/or do not deserve to be an American citizen (hi, President Bush Sr!) I get just a liiitle annoyed.

[narf poit chez BOOM]

I can understand that.

[Mephisto]

RonGianti said:
Too bad the guy who killed her parents with a hammer, then killed her brother a week later and repeatedly raped the 8 year old girl for a week didn't believe the same as you.

It is horrible and a shame, no doubt about that. But I fail to see how killing him will make anybody else alive or give them justice. As much as I despise what such people do, they are still people and killing without dire need (read: self defense or defense of others from imminent peril) is wrong. The public is just as save when you put them into jail for the time being. An argument that this will cost money is, well, very problematic. Can it be right to kill someone to save cash?
The world did not come crashing down on my country when the death penalty was abolish 60 years ago. My humble opinion.

RonGianti said: And it should be her right, when she is old enough to decide, that if it would feel right to her that a trial go on, and he be put to death for his crimes, that too should be her inalienable right, not through herself as an individual, but through the institution of goverment, which has the right to enforce its higher will on individuals and always has.

I think we must agree to disagree over the matter. IMHO there is no unalienable right to kill someone for revenge. And if no individual has this right, it cannot be transferred to the state. All power of the state derives from the people.

In the end, we do agree on the subject of women rights. It is sick how many women are treated.

[Wenin]

Lowest common denominator.

If you dislike how the news makes its money, then write a letter, stop watching... or both.

The really ugly stuff that the article describes has always been around in one form or another. Just with today's technology, and our massive use of it, the ugly truth is revealed. Society isn't in decline, it is right where it has always been. It's just in High Def color now.


Protect yourself. Live your life how you see fit. Fight crime when you are able.

I haven't seen the Clinque ad, nor the Telephone company ad.

However I like playing the Grand Theft Auto series of games, just how I like playing the Halo series games.

Freedom is a painful thing, because in order for you to have it... you have to allow others to have it as well. Video games, news stories, TV ads.... these don't make people do anything. People need to be responsible for their own damn actions. Stop blaming others for their misdeeds.

Someone isn't a porn junky because the internet easily provides it. They're that way because they lack self control.

Someone isn't a murderer because they played violent video games. The very notion should be ridiculous to a logically thinking person, however the more that notion is pushed... the more people will use it to come to terms with their own behavior.

I didn't murder people, the video games made me do it.

What crap.

[Fyron]

dmm said:
Without these things, morality becomes strictly a matter of opinion...

Christian morality is just as much a matter of opinion as that of any other religion, or humanist moral systems. How can you rightfully assert that the moral system of one arbitrary religion is somehow the absolute truth? You can make such assertions about any religious moral system; it doesn't mean one is somehow more true or better than others.

Morality does not derive from religion; religious doctrine generally mimics morality.

[Atrocities]

Run a pole and see if people favor the death penalty.

I don't believe that we should use the DP lightly. I firmly believe that is should only be used in extreme measure and reserved for the most hanious of crimes. I also firmly believe that the appeals process for a DP conviction should be limited to no more than 60 months with the execution taking place no later than 61 months from sentencing.

Before a procesecuter can seek the DP, they must first obtain a conviction for the crime, and then meet solid irrefutable concreat cryteria for the death penalty. No more sending the wrong guy too the gallow's!

I also believe that once a suspect has been arrested that a national media gage order be issued preventing any news organization from discussing the case other than to say so and so has been arrested and will be tried. This will remove any chance for jury tampering and or byass. A person should ALWAYS be considered inocent until convicted. Far too many times has the media convicted a person in the court of public affairs just to discover that the person was inocent. Once a conviction / aquittal is obtained, then the media can cover the story all they want.

I think that the prospect of being convicted of a crime and sentenced to life in a solitary 8x10 cell with only 1 hour per week of yard time would go a lot futher than the fear of being put too death. All criminals do solitary confinment for the duration of their sentence. Sure the cost would go up, but lets face it, they are not there too be coddeled, they are there to be punished and punished they should be. Not beaten or humilated, but isolated and cut off from the rest of the prison population. A prison full of 8,000 prisoners who never see or talk to each other or any one else except a family visit once a month. That would do more for rehabilitation than any life sentence ever could.

No books, no TV, no radio, just the convict, a cot, and an 8x10 cell 365 days a year, year after year.