Letters to the Editor
leftychris
Published Letters: 354 Editor's Choice: 4
-
@Anonymous (in re: your post "Life Sentences")
[Read the article: Fearful fathers]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]You coninually misrepresent my arguments and make me seem like I'm attacking victims of sexual abuse and defending those who commit such crimes. It's extremely irritating and tiresome.
When you posted earlier about puishment for child molesters, you said that they should be given life w/o parole in ALL cases. You made no distinctions whatsoever. THAT is what I took issue with.
No SINGLE child molestation or rape is as serious a crime as murder. I'm sorry if you feel differently, but I think that's a rational and common sense take on the issue. Given the fact that many killers in this country are sentenced to less than life w/o parole, it stands to reason that rapists and child molesters should not be given that sentence for their crimes.
Also, like I pointed out, there is a huge difference between child rape and cases that involve fondling or touching, mutual nudity, having the child touch the adults genitals, etc. They are all crimes, but crimes of different magnitudes, and they should be punished accordingly. You're not going to get an argument from me that a violent sadist who ties up, rapes, and tortures a kid shouldn't get a life sentence, but I don't agree in such harsh, lifetime punishment for someone who fondles a kid.
Finally, nothing you wrote in your first post advocating life sentences distinguished one-time offenders from repeat offenders. Obviously, in cases where it's known that the offender had multiple victims, or if the offender has offended again in the same way after being released from prison, then harsher punishment is called for. That's a basic principle of the criminal justice system. However, you seem to be advocating life w/o parole for any and all child molesters, no matter the severity of their crime and no matter the number of victims. I cannot support such an idea, for many reasons, but among them are that it violates the idea that you punish people for crimes they've committed, for victims that are known, not for assumed or hypothesized crimes/victims; it also violates the principle that you punish someone for crimes they've committed, not for crimes they might possibly commit in the future.
Finally, I really don't appreciate you twisting my words and arguments to say that I'm attacking sex crimes victims or their advocates, and blaming them for the hesitancy many men have with the idea of working with children. You're really mischaracterizing what I've written, and I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say that your misrepresentations have been unintentional and accidental. I encourage you to read other posts more carefully in the future before you lash out at their content.
-
Well, it's happened...
[Read the article: Fearful fathers]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The equation of sex abuse with terrorism! It was only a matter of time. Can a Nazi reference be far behind?
This discussion has jumped the rails of logic and common sense and started to fly into Never-Never land, as discussions of rape and child molestation ALWAYS do on feminist blogs and discussion boards. I can't say I'm surprised.
Yep, you're right--every man (we all know that no matter what, women will continue to be slapped on the wrist for their sex abuse of children) who's convicted of child molestation--even if it was just one incident, and even if it only involved touching a child's genitals--no penetration--should be given life w/o parole. And our prisons can start paroling murderers and armed robbers and drug dealers and rapists of adult women to make room for all of them.
Actually, better yet, why stop at life w/o parole? Lethal injection for all of them!
I should look again into emigration to Europe. This country has clearly gone looney tunes.
I'm out of this thread. Continue the fun discussion without me. Say hi to Peter Pan and Captain Hook when you see them!
-
@mappeal
[Read the article: Greening the mommy wars]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]My answer to any fundementalists on this issue is that I believe in strictly interpreting the bible and since marriage is between ONE man and ONE woman (according to them) and I am supposed to go forth and multiply its very simple. 1x1=1.
That is priceless! LOL Thanks so much for bringing a smile to my face during a dreary day at work :-)
-
@Rachael F (in re: your post "In Addition")
[Read the article: Bill Maher: "Don't show me your tits!" ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Bravo, you nailed it precisely! Excellent post, very well-put, balanced, fair, and reasonable. I do so hope you're granted a fancy red star for it ;-)
-
@fetboy
[Read the article: Bill Maher: "Don't show me your tits!" ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]but why do these men, that I assume also like to look at nude women, have a problem with public feeding? Might it be because they feel inadequate? Or is it because they are ashamed of the fact that they are jealous of the infants.
Methinks you're over-intellectualizing this just a tad bit. Plus, you're guilty of the offense of blaming men only for this problem. That's inaccurate. I've known a fair share of women over the years who've had a problem with indiscreet public breastfeeding--in fact, some of the most extreme negative reactions I've ever encountered on this issue have been from women. Care to psychologize about that?
-
And snaps to what gradysu said:
[Read the article: Bill Maher: "Don't show me your tits!" ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Maher's larger theme -- which went completely uncommented on in this cherry-picking article -- is that a lot of American mothers have an overweening (excuse the expression) sense of entitlement. It's like the world should stop on its axis because they gave birth, which, as Maher -- A COMEDIAN, let's remember -- points out, a dog can do.
Perfectly satirized by The Onion back in 1999:
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/miracle_of_birth_occurs_for_83
Maher can be funny, but The Onion got essentially the same point across much, much better!