(Untitled)

Mar 02, 2005 16:22

Okay LJ, this is where you help me out. This is where I vent to you and you're supposed to diffuse my anger and frustration with the world ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 10

burningcorazon March 2 2005, 22:59:58 UTC
I am half and half due to personal experience. I believe that some juvenile offenders are 'very' aware of the actions that they take. I have worked with children that define "the good son". However, I also know that a teenage childs hormones, social anxiety and over all angst often lead to making the dumbest choices possible. I feel that proper prison sentence and corrective rehabilitation measures to ensure workability once released are sufficent for almost all child offenders. I also know, especially with one kid that I worked with, that his sexual predation patterns would only get worse once 18.

In my family we have dealt with murder in both cases, offender and victim. Each case should be looked at on an individual basis. I do agree with the ruling that mentally challenged people with an IQ lower than 70 should not face capital punishment.

Christian's, in general, should often just leave their feet in their mouth. I have some of the freaky ones where I work also. We even have one that speaks to Jesus, quite frequently, outloud.

Reply

fancy_catsup March 3 2005, 16:29:41 UTC
Well sure juvenille offenders are aware of the reprecussions and that they would be doing something morally wrong, but that doesn't mean that they are hopeless cases of human beings & can't be nurtured and potentially rehabilitated. Oh wait, that smells a little too much like charity.

I forgot to tell you what one of the ladies said: "Now that 17-year-olds know that they can murder someone and not get the death penalty, there will be lots more of them killing"

Uh huh. Actual quote.

Watch out for 17-year-olds people. They are remoresless monsters who will eat your babies and rape your grandmothers. Now that they have *permission* to kill, no one is safe!

Reply


m_a_dinkins March 2 2005, 23:33:32 UTC
those persons that think someone who 'knows right from wrong' and has committed violence deserves violence in return, do not know right from wrong themselves. violence is wrong. violence resulting in death is very very wrong, no matter who assumes the role of victim or assailant.

the problem is the inability of society to properly socialize its constituents. institutionalization is a poor substitute for education. schools as they exist now are WRONG. hospitals as they exist now are WRONG. prisons as they exist now are WRONG. wage slavery as it exists now is WRONG. wrong both morally and actually.

the true teachings of christ were long ago subsumed by imperical conquest. christ had one lesson, and that lesson is: death is inevitable, and 'sacrifice' is an illusion.

Reply

RIGHT fancy_catsup March 3 2005, 16:56:39 UTC
"Actually wrong". That is so right.

Two wrongs don't make a right. It makes a hypocrite.

But, is there a line out there somewhere? What if someone's killed thousands of people. Is that worse than killing one person? Are we more justified to take away that person's right to live?

Reply

Re: RIGHT m_a_dinkins March 3 2005, 20:07:14 UTC
first of all, i am a firm believer that hypocrisy is not necessarily a negative quality. inconsistency is one of my favorite past-times ( ... )

Reply


klhart March 3 2005, 02:04:24 UTC
you probably care what they think because they (as in the sort of persons you're having to work with, that we all work with) make up the vast majority of this country's population. and that just plain sucks. i must say, i agree with dinkins on this. with the additional comment about the whole uber-christians pro-death penalty conundrum...perhaps those who believe whole heartedly in the fact that all they need do is invite jesus into their hearts are A)free from damnation and B)more righteous than any one so evil as commit crime. the same lines of thinking are what make things such as sexism, racism and homophobia all integral parts of organized religions, in the past and present. the "masses=asses" feels so horrifically cliche on the tongue but continually springs to mind.

Reply

fancy_catsup March 3 2005, 19:34:39 UTC
You're so right Katie. I guess I’m more sad than angry, because these people don’t seem to be reachable. I'm also sad because those facets of organized religion that you listed above, sexism, racism and homophobia (= hatred) continue to be what scares me away from organized religions. And the righteousness!! GOD!! Where does that come from??

Reply

dangerousp March 4 2005, 16:17:23 UTC
I don't understand "masses=asses", what does that refer to? I agree with the complacency of being "born again", but I think it is a small victim of the western generalization of wanting things in life to change by virtue of some spell and to automatically be one of the "chosen" because some words have been said in the right order. This complacency breeds contempt for those who have either not said the words you did to become "born again" or the ones who have gone against what you believe so egregiously. All of this having been said, it is true and real that no child or adult deserves to loose his life for taking another. One harm on God's creation does not deserve another, ever. This philosophy should not stop at the uterus. Yes the church is a male dominated theocratic bureaucracy, I think you would have to be blind to not see that. That there are those that say it does not care anything for women is ludicrous. There is, however, a serious conflict of conscience when it comes to the fetus' right to live and the mother's right to her ( ... )

Reply


wonderful conversation dangerousp March 3 2005, 13:40:09 UTC
My favorites are the Catholics who are pro-life and pro-capital punishment. Life is sacred even after it has left the womb and murdered someone. Let's remember Jesus ate supper on many occassions with people that now we would differentiate but then were seen as a murderer's equal or worse. All life is sacred. All life is also capable of violence. I know that is a hurtful and easily deniable thing to say, but it is true. You ought to read Pope John Paul II's treatise on this concept. He is wonderfully intellectual and consistant about what has now become the Church's policy on life. Also Tohmas Merton weighs in on this occassionally. This debate will never end.

Reply


bladedante March 8 2005, 15:22:02 UTC
If you have a chance, pick up a book called God's Politics by Jim Wallis. Very insightful.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up