Wes Pedersen (10/01):
Ron, your logic may be persuasive, but your conclusion is flawed by the fact that this young man plotted and committed the execution of innocents. I trust no PR person will succumb to your fair is fair argument. Nothing this man child has done has been fair.
Ron Levy (10/09):
Wes, if it's okay for us to kill even an insane man who has "plotted and committed the execution of innocents," would it be okay to kill you and me and other Americans because our General Harris, known as "Butch" (for "butcher") committed the execution of millions of innocent civilians with massive bombings including the non-military city of Dresden where 130,000 civilians died in flames?
Is it okay for the Arabs to murder Christians because Christian crusaders murdered Arabs? Or for Christians to murder Romans because Roman emperors had lions kill Christians in the colisseum?
Brian, you say that doing PR for the killer is "impossible to justify" but how about if the message is not to let the guy go but that killing is wrong even when done by the government. Do you think that PR is "impossible to justify" even on "killing is wrong"?
If it's okay to oppose killing a fetus, is it so much worse to oppose killing a fetus that has gone to term and been born?
Anonymous, you say that "an eye for an eye and a life for a life" are not bad ideas but can you see where "love thy neighbor" is also not a bad idea, and "blessed are the merciful"? You and I are not alone if we have ever begged God to "forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us." Nor if we actually do forgive trespasses.
Some comment anonymously in favor of death. Some ACT anonymously in mobs or in the dark to cause death but judge whether we have more reason to be proud if we--not anonymously but openly--say "I believe in God's law that thou shalt not kill."
I am in no hurry to kill human beings, including the mentally ill stepson of our brother, Chris Komisarjevsky, because they seem to some like "more of a burden to society than they are worth."
Can you or I someday, if we get terminal cancer or Alzheimer's Disease, seem like more of a burden to society than we are worth? Would it be okay to kill us if the day comes when our societal value becomes negative?
Brian M (10/01):
I'm going to go with no one has volunteered because it would be 1) impossible to justify, and 2) the end of their PR business. This nutcase will draw zero interest to the important cause of mental illness because he illicits zero empathy. He's a symbol of gun violence not mental health.
anonymous (10/01):
An eye for an eye and a life for a life are not bad ideas.
Joe Honick, GMA International Ltd (10/05):
When you stop to think how powerful PR "cleansed" the histories of Hitler financier Henry Ford and others, it is not beyond belief at all that someone could be recruited for much of anything....even marketing a war or two. Only reason Holmes will not get it is simple: who would put up the dough? Does he deserve it? Hell, no!
Ron Levy (10/10):
Joe, it's not that HE deserves it.
WE deserve it. We the people, in order to have a more perfect union, should have laws that oppose intentional killing of Americans.
If we're going to have "In God We Trust" on our money and public buildings, should we trust and not violate God's order, "Thou shalt not kill"?
If bright people say "we should kill him because he deserves it," we're announcing to all people--including many who are not bright--that killing is okay and that some people do deserve it.
We deserve that Americans should not be told by judges that it's okay, or even a good thing, to kill some people.
Can you see, even reluctantly, some sense in the idea that the insane should be locked away and perhaps treated? And that neither the insane, the demented, hopeless and nasty drunks, criminals nor anyone else should be killed at taxpayer expense?
|
