Shopping & Style0 min ago
I dont want to spark up a massive debate but...
42 Answers
The programme on last night about James Bulger got me thinking - loads of really bad and sick things happen everyday - things we couldn't even imagine! Alot performed by adults with fully developed minds and conscious so when religious people are asked WHY did god allow this to happen - FREE WILL is what they answer - Ok i guess fair enough. But What about 2 children doing such a thing to another child? They coungered up a plan - went to a Mall - took a little boy - walked for 3 miles! - Tied him to a rail way track and watched him die? Where was god when they made this plan - when they walked the 3 miles passing people and being let go - when they stood and watched a baby die? Im not out to cause and argument or anything like that Im genuinely interested in peoples answers x
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by lubecki161. 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.
Naomi, as I said, I believe that is a factor, but equally there are people who grow up in happy loving stable homes who go out and commit premeditated atrocities, and there are those as cab has said grew up in unstable and violent homes who do not go on to do such things. This murder was not a �random act of madness�.
If it comes down to personality as well, then that is inherent isn�t it? If not, then a lot of crimes could be seen as circumstantial, in the �blame the parents� vein. Not culpable by any means, but perhaps there is a particular gene. I suppose as yet noone can prove or demonstrate it either way.
Perhaps, Dave, one of the few hopes that the mother has � apart from the other son and a charitable campaign in James� name � is that she may one day see her son again in heaven.
If it comes down to personality as well, then that is inherent isn�t it? If not, then a lot of crimes could be seen as circumstantial, in the �blame the parents� vein. Not culpable by any means, but perhaps there is a particular gene. I suppose as yet noone can prove or demonstrate it either way.
Perhaps, Dave, one of the few hopes that the mother has � apart from the other son and a charitable campaign in James� name � is that she may one day see her son again in heaven.
This is the whole 'Nature Versus Nurture' debate. I don't really believe a child can be born evil as such,but they can be born with certain problems that may cause their brains to develop in a different way,possibly due to alcohol or drug abuse in the pregnant mother.There is also the possibility that some of these children may be sociopathic or psychopathic(or both).
Then comes the nurturing part...........if a child is born with one of the problems i've mentioned and their upbringing is not ideal then they are more likely to perform 'evil' acts.
God and Satan don't really come into it in my opinion.
Then comes the nurturing part...........if a child is born with one of the problems i've mentioned and their upbringing is not ideal then they are more likely to perform 'evil' acts.
God and Satan don't really come into it in my opinion.
Bcak drifter given that in an atheiset - you can hope what you like.
It just amazes me when this holier than thou types, who constantly tell you that God is love, that god will protect you, that god is all seeing, that he knows everything you do. Have off pat answers when it appears that the plan has come off the rails.
An innocent child dies, a child that can have done nothing in his short life, to justifie his death let alone the way of it, when someone asks where was god in all of this, he wasn't there.
Christianity preaches that you have to have faith, beacause god knows everything, but when this is questioned lets look at other reasons to hide behind.
Faith is everything, however it does have all the answers and if you didn't like the first answer there are others in fact an inexhaustable supply.
I believe that Jamie Bulgers parents were staunch Catholics and I bet there isn't a day they don't wake up and think of him, not a day his Mum doesn't torture herself about that day. If its not hell on earth what is.
Keep the faith.
It just amazes me when this holier than thou types, who constantly tell you that God is love, that god will protect you, that god is all seeing, that he knows everything you do. Have off pat answers when it appears that the plan has come off the rails.
An innocent child dies, a child that can have done nothing in his short life, to justifie his death let alone the way of it, when someone asks where was god in all of this, he wasn't there.
Christianity preaches that you have to have faith, beacause god knows everything, but when this is questioned lets look at other reasons to hide behind.
Faith is everything, however it does have all the answers and if you didn't like the first answer there are others in fact an inexhaustable supply.
I believe that Jamie Bulgers parents were staunch Catholics and I bet there isn't a day they don't wake up and think of him, not a day his Mum doesn't torture herself about that day. If its not hell on earth what is.
Keep the faith.
I can't understand why you need to introduce some supernatural factor into the equation, Octavius.
If your point is to say that other people suffer terrible deprivations yet don't commit such terrible acts, then I would have to say that they don't suffer the *exact* same deprivations and anyway, why should different people have the same tolerances for such deprivations?
Additionally, we don't know about diet, we don't know about genetic disposition, and there are plenty of other factors that contribute towards behaviour that could explain what happened (which is not to pretend I have any great insight into exactly how these two children became debased to a point that they carried out their apalling actions).
I can totally understand calling the acts 'evil', but labelling the boys 'evil' is a cop out. Malicious? Yes. Cruel? Undeniably. 'Evil' is just a surrender. It's down to a failure of language, I guess, but it's the fact that it allows the actions to be boxed up in a way that implies the label is a satisfactory explanation in and of itself. It isn't.
If your point is to say that other people suffer terrible deprivations yet don't commit such terrible acts, then I would have to say that they don't suffer the *exact* same deprivations and anyway, why should different people have the same tolerances for such deprivations?
Additionally, we don't know about diet, we don't know about genetic disposition, and there are plenty of other factors that contribute towards behaviour that could explain what happened (which is not to pretend I have any great insight into exactly how these two children became debased to a point that they carried out their apalling actions).
I can totally understand calling the acts 'evil', but labelling the boys 'evil' is a cop out. Malicious? Yes. Cruel? Undeniably. 'Evil' is just a surrender. It's down to a failure of language, I guess, but it's the fact that it allows the actions to be boxed up in a way that implies the label is a satisfactory explanation in and of itself. It isn't.
No not in the sense of being possessed by the devil Waldo, if that�s what you thought.
I guess one thing we could learn is that where a parent(s) demonstrates the characteristics and parenting skills that the Thomspons and Venables did, then in all probability the children will do the same as they grow into that life. But if that is the case, then what can we do about it? The idea that they simply had a bad upbringing that led them to that fateful day and that re-education would remove that malicious element, would in some way satiate some of my objection to their release.
I guess one thing we could learn is that where a parent(s) demonstrates the characteristics and parenting skills that the Thomspons and Venables did, then in all probability the children will do the same as they grow into that life. But if that is the case, then what can we do about it? The idea that they simply had a bad upbringing that led them to that fateful day and that re-education would remove that malicious element, would in some way satiate some of my objection to their release.
I personally hate religion.. churches break me out in a cold sweat and I dont think we need them for morals as I am a good person and I dont go near them.
I think a lot of the problem stems from our society of which we are all a part. I believe that guy who shot all those kids at a primary school in dumblain was a loner who was basically shunned by a society which remourslesly taunts those who dont match up to ideals of sexual and social success in life. He was a loser in the game of life and possibly had issues with regards to parenting and his own levels of worth and accdeptance to boot.. one day he decided he was taking his revenge .. Its horrific but It shows that it is easy for us to Judge but we are not in there minds so we dont know what is going on. It has been said before that no one acts innapropriatly given there model of the world.. is this grounds for forgivness? depends on your position.. I certainly dont subscribe to the simplistic notion of 'the devil' making us do it.. I think the world has to move on from that. what also annoys me is the kind of tabloid 'blame and shame' culture.. which stems from the idea of inherent evil
I think a lot of the problem stems from our society of which we are all a part. I believe that guy who shot all those kids at a primary school in dumblain was a loner who was basically shunned by a society which remourslesly taunts those who dont match up to ideals of sexual and social success in life. He was a loser in the game of life and possibly had issues with regards to parenting and his own levels of worth and accdeptance to boot.. one day he decided he was taking his revenge .. Its horrific but It shows that it is easy for us to Judge but we are not in there minds so we dont know what is going on. It has been said before that no one acts innapropriatly given there model of the world.. is this grounds for forgivness? depends on your position.. I certainly dont subscribe to the simplistic notion of 'the devil' making us do it.. I think the world has to move on from that. what also annoys me is the kind of tabloid 'blame and shame' culture.. which stems from the idea of inherent evil
Is it possible for good or evil to be carried in the genes? I would say other things are far more likely to influence a child's personality. Peer pressure, television, music, adult conversation - and as has been mentioned, even diet could be a contributory factor. In today's world all children, whether from loving homes or from broken homes are subjected to adverse situations and influences - but their understanding of the world around them usually bears no relation to the way in which an adult understands things. How can we tell what encouraged these two children to commit this murder? I believe to say that a child is 'inherently' evil, or to blame the devil, is a complete abrogation of society's responsibility.
Look how many times must I say it, I was saying it was a combination of things, as are you. Despute being a 'religioinst', I don�t see religion in this any more than you do, so please stop trying to twist my words Naomi. My 1st post was in direct correlation to the OP which questioned the motivation or inactivity of God. My subsequent posts were questioning whether it was just down to upbringing, in which case it may not be entirely their �fault� but ultimately it is.
On the basis of the external factors of which you talk, then as I said, it makes their release more palatable doesn�t it.
On the basis of the external factors of which you talk, then as I said, it makes their release more palatable doesn�t it.
I truly believe that it is largely nurture with a little bit of nature thrown in. If you were to take an apparently healthy normal newborn and place an ever increasing weight on the end of its leg, by about six months old the leg would be appreciably longer than the other one. In my view similar alteration can be made to a child's mind by the use of external stimuli of one sort or another. Of course there are children with differing susceptibilities to such factors, and some more timid children who might perhaps think these things but would not have the inherent bravery to actually do something about it.
I also believe that it is possible to rehabilitate offenders of almost any sort. Children would be easier than adults I would imagine. I sincerely hope I am right because that makes me feel more comfortable about allowing these two young people back into the community. Only time will tell.
I also believe that it is possible to rehabilitate offenders of almost any sort. Children would be easier than adults I would imagine. I sincerely hope I am right because that makes me feel more comfortable about allowing these two young people back into the community. Only time will tell.
Lubecki, no one mentioned a row, except yourself. What you wanted I assume, was an answer to your question. It did indeed spark of a debate, which was admirable, as it gives people a chance to air their views, even if they don't answer your original question. As I said before, I can't see you getting a definite answer. As is being discussed there are so many variables, that it would be very hard to tie down all the bad things that happen to a specific reason.
Perhaps not Naomi, but I was talking to you.
My Q, was�.Does your assertion of their upbringing and influences being the sole factor therefore make it easier to accept that they are now rehabilitated and can therefore walk the streets and be in the company of other children? Are you comfortable in the knowledge that they are rehabilitated and all maliciousness incurred as a result of that upbringing has been removed through therapy?
My Q, was�.Does your assertion of their upbringing and influences being the sole factor therefore make it easier to accept that they are now rehabilitated and can therefore walk the streets and be in the company of other children? Are you comfortable in the knowledge that they are rehabilitated and all maliciousness incurred as a result of that upbringing has been removed through therapy?
Where was I on the day James disappeared? In and around Bootle Strand, did I see anything?
No, if I had seen anything would I have been able to stop it?
No.
I used to work with the one of the killers uncles, a nicer fellow you're less likely to meet.
In terms of Thompson and Venables I would have thought it right that they at least served the sentence they were given, in such circumstances I get the impression that the attitude is that we're sorry we're just not THAT sorry.
Is it better or worse that the killers were children themselves? Has a child not got more ability to reform and change? One of my exes lives off Tuebrook and would say not.
This might stir things up a bit, I remember when they were first arrested and taken to Marsh Lane Police Station, a mob descended upon the area and began chanting ##"let em out"## I cringed, and I cringed for 2 reasons.
1 Because as despicable and horrible as they are the sight of 2 ten year old boys hanging off a lamp post on Stanley Road is a sight I did not wish to see.
2 Look a the faces of the people singing they did'nt appear angry to me, they appeared to be enjoying themselves, a football style chant is certainly no way to convey anger.
Dunblane is a poor analogy and as for Sophie Lancaster I know (without meeting them) almost certainly the feelings of the killers "she was only a goth", the scenes outside Bootle magistrates court later on with the Bulger killers was genuine anger, anger at the way society was heading.
Thompson and Venables were our warning for the future, noone was listening....
No, if I had seen anything would I have been able to stop it?
No.
I used to work with the one of the killers uncles, a nicer fellow you're less likely to meet.
In terms of Thompson and Venables I would have thought it right that they at least served the sentence they were given, in such circumstances I get the impression that the attitude is that we're sorry we're just not THAT sorry.
Is it better or worse that the killers were children themselves? Has a child not got more ability to reform and change? One of my exes lives off Tuebrook and would say not.
This might stir things up a bit, I remember when they were first arrested and taken to Marsh Lane Police Station, a mob descended upon the area and began chanting ##"let em out"## I cringed, and I cringed for 2 reasons.
1 Because as despicable and horrible as they are the sight of 2 ten year old boys hanging off a lamp post on Stanley Road is a sight I did not wish to see.
2 Look a the faces of the people singing they did'nt appear angry to me, they appeared to be enjoying themselves, a football style chant is certainly no way to convey anger.
Dunblane is a poor analogy and as for Sophie Lancaster I know (without meeting them) almost certainly the feelings of the killers "she was only a goth", the scenes outside Bootle magistrates court later on with the Bulger killers was genuine anger, anger at the way society was heading.
Thompson and Venables were our warning for the future, noone was listening....
Latest Posts
Crosswords1 min ago
Spam & Scams2 mins ago
Reeves Is Now After Your Pension Funds
News4 mins ago
Film, Media & TV4 mins ago
Body & Soul5 mins ago
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.