"We Don't Use the Death Penalty Nearly Enough"
That line made me double take when I saw it in this online article today. That it was spoken by people in Utah about the death penalty was, to me, the "upper" on the incredulity scale. Don't we usually say that about exercise bikes?
"We don't use it nearly enough."
OK, so how often should you kill another person? I think that child molesters should be punished severely just as much as the next person does. But, given the whole "doubt" factor, and the ever-fluctuating concept of just what constitutes child molestation (are we talking about rape, I assume, or all "inappropriate touching?" You may think it sounds like a dumb question, but there's no rhyme or reason to anything anymore, and we mustn't assume anything), the confusion of some children and their vague memories of certain events, I don't think I'd care to leave anyone's fate up to a bunch of Mormons. Anyway, who are they to criticize anyone else for perversity? Hello?! Polygamy, anyone??
Supporters of these harsher execution guidelines say that it will send a message to would-be child molesters that they might "pay the ultimate price" for their crimes. Since most child molesters suffer from some sickness and can't really change their behavior (without mental intervention), I doubt that the fear of execution will cure their compulsion. Just like bombing Iraq didn't seem to cure its non-democracy. Face it, this isn't about deterrence, it's about revenge. And yes, it's understandable to want revenge on those who've wronged you. But let's not kid ourselves that this is going to deter or reduce crime. We already have the death penalty for murders. Yet people still get murdered.
Like the Iraq debacle, this one is supported mainly by Republicans. You know, the big ol' Christians who are all about love and shit? (Oh, whoops, we forgot: they only co-opted Christianity to further their agenda. Our bad!) We all know how much Republicans support war and execution (it's their way of getting "vicariously tough" with other people, while never leaving the comfort of their SUVs), so perhaps I have another solution: take all the child molesters and send them to fight in Iraq.
Sure! You can kill two birds by casting the same first stone! You get the miscreants away from you, AND get extra manpower over in Oilville. That way, you won't need this "troop surge" your Emperor Without Clothes keeps calling for. Think of the room and board you'll save by not keeping alleged criminals in prison!
Of course, it may deprive you of the viewing-room pleasure of watching someone get strapped down and fed Pine Sol intraveneously.
But I'm sure you'll find other ways to amuse yourselves. Like hunting.
"We don't use it nearly enough."
OK, so how often should you kill another person? I think that child molesters should be punished severely just as much as the next person does. But, given the whole "doubt" factor, and the ever-fluctuating concept of just what constitutes child molestation (are we talking about rape, I assume, or all "inappropriate touching?" You may think it sounds like a dumb question, but there's no rhyme or reason to anything anymore, and we mustn't assume anything), the confusion of some children and their vague memories of certain events, I don't think I'd care to leave anyone's fate up to a bunch of Mormons. Anyway, who are they to criticize anyone else for perversity? Hello?! Polygamy, anyone??
Supporters of these harsher execution guidelines say that it will send a message to would-be child molesters that they might "pay the ultimate price" for their crimes. Since most child molesters suffer from some sickness and can't really change their behavior (without mental intervention), I doubt that the fear of execution will cure their compulsion. Just like bombing Iraq didn't seem to cure its non-democracy. Face it, this isn't about deterrence, it's about revenge. And yes, it's understandable to want revenge on those who've wronged you. But let's not kid ourselves that this is going to deter or reduce crime. We already have the death penalty for murders. Yet people still get murdered.
Like the Iraq debacle, this one is supported mainly by Republicans. You know, the big ol' Christians who are all about love and shit? (Oh, whoops, we forgot: they only co-opted Christianity to further their agenda. Our bad!) We all know how much Republicans support war and execution (it's their way of getting "vicariously tough" with other people, while never leaving the comfort of their SUVs), so perhaps I have another solution: take all the child molesters and send them to fight in Iraq.
Sure! You can kill two birds by casting the same first stone! You get the miscreants away from you, AND get extra manpower over in Oilville. That way, you won't need this "troop surge" your Emperor Without Clothes keeps calling for. Think of the room and board you'll save by not keeping alleged criminals in prison!
Of course, it may deprive you of the viewing-room pleasure of watching someone get strapped down and fed Pine Sol intraveneously.
But I'm sure you'll find other ways to amuse yourselves. Like hunting.
posted by Aaron at 1:30 PM
3 Comments:
What part of seperation of church and state do these morons not understand?
Oh, let's go back to stoning people to death won't that be fun?
I don't think most people would want the death penalty for all the things worthy of death mentioned in the Bible. Pre-marital sex would wipe most of us out.
As would adultery. Which includes--oh, what is it again? Let me think--oh, right--having more than one spouse.
Oooh! When you get political it turns me on.
Post a Comment
<< Home