Donate SIGN UP

I too despair for humanity

Avatar Image
anotheoldgit | 11:15 Thu 19th Aug 2010 | News
26 Answers
http://www.guardian.c...ght-supervision-order

I first had to read the previous post before I started on my subject in case serminator was posting on the same subject.

But no his post was about a bull, yet my 'despair for humanity' was regarding this attempted child gang rape by two (under the age of criminal conviction) disgusting little savages.

These two little cretins got off almost scot free, all they got was a supervision order and made to sign the sex offenders register, for attempting to gang rape an eight year old girl.
Gravatar

Answers

21 to 26 of 26rss feed

First Previous 1 2

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Not being an expert on rape - I have to ask the question....

Is a child of ten even capable of rape? as in.. 'penetration'???

I would have thought that they would have to be erect before penetration can be achieved and that a child of ten would not physically be capable of this?

Sorry if this is a bit crude (well very crude!) but it was something I had wondered about at the time I read the news that the little girl had lied about it.

Cant imagine the types of families these people come from!!!
Question Author
andy-hughes

All very noble liberal thinking no doubt, but I wonder if you would have felt the same towards these two little 'cretins', 'savages' ( I make no apology) if you had to drag them off your own 8 year Daughter or Grand-Daughter?

Please answer me that.
I have responded to this very point from a number of AB'ers in the past AOG - you may indeed be one of them.

I speak from a detatched analytical point of view - as do we all - given that we are not directly involved in this whole sorry affair - and can therefore be objective - well, at least those of us with any sense of objectivity can so do.

If it was a relative of mine, then i would of course feel totally differently, as would any relative, but that is not the issue under debate here, and is therefore not pertinent.

I am choosing to ignore your apparent slight in my 'very noble liberal thinking' - it is neither, it is simply a human approach to a very sad situation.

You need make no apology to me - we all express ourselves as we see fit - the major plus of free speeech.

Answer you that? I have, thank you.
Question Author
Surely andy, This is the part I cannot get my head round, you say you would feel totally differently, if it was a relative of yours, but seeing it isn't, you can enjoy the privilege of being sympathetic to these two youngsters.

This attitude is no difference to those that say "yes why not build that mosque, it will be a benefit to the area, but don't let it spoil my view".

I am sorry you were offended by my apparent slight, I did not mean it to be, I was just trying to get across the fact that it has been this type of liberal thinking that has got us in the mess we find ourselves in today..
///This is the part I cannot get my head round, you say you would feel totally differently, if it was a relative of yours, but seeing it isn't, you can enjoy the privilege of being sympathetic to these two youngsters. ////

That is a misrepresentation of what andy wrote. A common error by aog.
andy did not say he was sympathetic he said he was being objective ie fair, reasonable, seeing both sides, rational rather than emotional as one would be if directly involved.

If someone hurt my dog my immediate response would be to separate their head from their body with my bare hands.
However, I would not reasonably argue that injuring a dog should bring about a return of capital punishment.
Do you get it now?
Particularly in terms of our legal system;
Detachment = objective reasoning=good
Direct involvement=emotional irrationality=bad
.
I find your approach to 'liberal thinking' interesting AOG.

You manage to make the term almost insulting because, if i deduce correctly. you equate 'liberalism' with a lack of thought, or control, of morality, an 'anything goes' approach to the world in general.

As someone who prides themselves as a liberal thinker, I assure you that i do not have the 'anything goes' attitude that you so despise.

i simply try to approach the issues you raise from a point of view of rationality. i utterly refuse to be pumped up by our self-righteous media, and I have never been a vengeful person, so i feel able to try and take a detatched view of situations which do not directly affect me.

To do otherwise is to enter a downward spiral of vitriol and hatred against just about anything that goes against what could be judged to be a reasonable attitude to the world around us.

I cannot live that way, i am not made that way, and if my 'liberal thinking' implies any laxity of morality or a view of right and wrong, then i have to confirm that such a view is misplaced - in my case, and of course, i only speak for myself.

21 to 26 of 26rss feed

First Previous 1 2

Do you know the answer?

I too despair for humanity

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.