Link Stats
Added By: Jeremy
Added on: 03/05/2009 @ 3:19:59 PM
Link View Count: 552
Politics
Politics
Rate this Link
Yours:

Rated 0 times.

Man not responsible for beheading

I'm not sure how I feel about this, and cases like it.

On one hand, your brain is an organ which relies on many things being in balance. You are no more to "blame" for your body failing to produce a chemical that controls rage/paranoia than you are if it's insulin. It's not a matter of will or desire. You can just be broken, plain and simple, and just like we can treat diabetes (without "blaming" diabetics), we can treat mental disorders. (Contrary to what Tom Cruise might think.)

Conversely, YOU did still commit these acts. Maybe we need to shift the focus off "blame" of you and onto the protection of everyone else. Even if your condition is chemical, and directly treatable, if you're 1 missed pill away from being Jack the Ripper one could argue you still aren't fit for society. If it's a more subjective condition that, after years of just talking it over with someone, they feel you're "fit" then it seems like we'd have even less assurances of a relapse.

Also, there's two implications I don't like here. One: Murdering people, even with "cause" in the heat of the moment, can get you tossed in the slammer forever. Mutilate someone, and claim God told you to do it, and you're not responsible for your actions. From a "danger to society" standpoint that seems backwards. Two: Are we really then supposed to believe that the Jeffrey Dahmers of the world are perfectly sound human beings with a perfectly rational affinity for mass murder and a perfectly reasonable desire to eat other people? Without getting too "slippery slopey" it sure seems like we're setting some precedents that are going to make it hard to lock up tomorrow's Dahmer. (I know in this case it's in Canada, but similar things have played out here.)

As a side note, that hopefully doesn't open a can of worms, why is it that anytime someone does something outside the normal expected societal behavior and claims "God told them to do it" we immediately assume they are coo coo bananas, meanwhile millions of people claim to frequently speak with God, or leave major life decisions "up to God" and this is accepted/encouraged? God told me to gather people together and that he was coming back to earth and we should be ready. Insane. God told me to play for the Green Bay Packers, then come out of retirement and play for the Panthers. Makes sense.

Anyway, what's your verdict?
View External Link [news.yahoo.com]
Back to Link List
scott.jpgScott - 6225 Posts
03/05/2009 @ 08:00:33 PM
 Quote this comment
God told me to gather people together and that he was coming back to earth and we should be ready.
This example is crazy, because God made it clear in the Bible that no one will know the time or the place. So if anyone claims that God is telling them that he is coming back, there is no truth in something like that. There is no possibility of truth in something like that.

Now, if I say that I believe God lead me to Florida and that I left my job situation up to him, I am basing that not on "God spoke the words to me literally and verbally", but rather that if my desires are in line with his that he will provide for me what I need. God opened certain doors for me, and that's how I ended up getting a job the day after I moved to Florida. If Reggie White claimed that God told him to play for the Green Bay Packers, it's because a), he's a football player, so it's not all that crazy for him to claim that he is being led to play for a certain team, and b) he saw a young team and a small community, and a place to further what he saw was God's plan (at least one player that I know of became a pastor in part becuase of Reggie's influence).

To me, there is a very real and very clear difference in those two concepts. Make a claim about the God of the Bible that is completely misaligned with the teachings of said Bible, you are nothing but crazy. Make a claim that God is moving your life in a certain direction, and there is nothing biblically contradictory in your claims, you are not crazy.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Scott edited this at 03/05/2009 8:02:30 pm
images.jpgcraig - 131 Posts
03/05/2009 @ 08:52:57 PM
 Quote this comment
Scott Wrote - Today @ 08:00:33 PM
God told me to gather people together and that he was coming back to earth and we should be ready.
This example is crazy, because God made it clear in the Bible that no one will know the time or the place. So if anyone claims that God is telling them that he is coming back, there is no truth in something like that. There is no possibility of truth in something like that.


Actually the bible does make it clear when he (I assume you mean Jesus?) was coming back. Matthew 16:28 states, "Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom." Now of course you can find 10 billion interpretations of that passage which claim it means other than the one thing that it couldn't be stating any more clearly (and by the way which didn't happen.)

I think people use the "it was God's will" statements a way of explaining/justifying things/events that are beyond their control, while the 'God told me' statements are just a way of justifying doing what they want to do but are to afraid/ashamed/embarrassed to admit that's what they want.

God told me to post this.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
craig messed with this at 03/05/2009 8:53:40 pm
2887.gifAlex - Ignorance is bliss to those uneducated
03/05/2009 @ 09:23:05 PM
 Quote this comment
To the subjectivity of the insanity plea, I agree that it's dangerous/foolish/impossible to "correctly" split hairs when it comes to determining the criminal's fate. I think that regardless of the person's mental state something this serious absolutely has to go on their criminal record and they should have to do the same time (obviously there is lots of leeway in actual sentencing) as anyone else. To the point of blame and having a chemical imbalance or whatever, it's probably fair that if the defendant's mental condition is determined to be less than healthy that they should receive counseling or medical treatment and not necessarily have to serve their sentence in the general prison population. But they should still do the time, and then have the extra burden of proving that their mental health has improved enough to be released after that.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
2887.gifAlex - Who controls the past now controls the future
03/05/2009 @ 09:49:13 PM
 Quote this comment
"that hopefully doesn't open a can of worms"

Yeah right, you're the resident Nutcan opener of the worms.

I think you're right that there's a double standard when it comes to this.

I have some vague thoughts beyond that but it's not translating "onto paper". I think maybe what I want to say is that such a statement of religious content should be largely irrelevant in court in a country that promises freedom of religion (I don't know what Canada's official stance is). If the government make's no claim as to which, if any, gods are real, then there is no way to prove or disprove the claim "God told me to do it" and therefore the statement can not be used as an indicator of mental health. Of course the problem always is what is the definition of religion? If I say, "Mt. Rushmore told me to do it" is that a religious belief or I am officially crazy? So it all becomes a massive gray area that is highly susceptible to double standards.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
jeremy.jpgJeremy - The pig says "My wife is a slut?"
03/05/2009 @ 11:29:01 PM
 Quote this comment
Alex Wrote - Today @ 09:49:13 PM
Yeah right, you're the resident Nutcan opener of the worms.


Well, I don't like it when we go 5 days without a meaningful post of any kind, but I also didn't want to start a flame war. I guess what I meant was that I hoped the discussion could be "limited" to the rather simple observation I mentioned, the double standard, as you call it, and not turn into a "does God exist" debate, which is really not what I meant/implied.

Scott Wrote - Today @ 08:00:33 PM
God told me to gather people together and that he was coming back to earth and we should be ready.
This example is crazy, because God made it clear in the Bible that no one will know the time or the place. So if anyone claims that God is telling them that he is coming back, there is no truth in something like that. There is no possibility of truth in something like that.


I think you're being a little too literal there. Fine, change the words "he was coming back to earth" to "we should wait for a messenger comet God is sending, and all wear the same track suit."


Scott Wrote - Today @ 08:00:33 PM
Now, if I say that I believe God lead me to Florida and that I left my job situation up to him, I am basing that not on "God spoke the words to me literally and verbally", but rather that if my desires are in line with his that he will provide for me what I need. God opened certain doors for me, and that's how I ended up getting a job the day after I moved to Florida.


Maybe this is a bit personal, and a bit off the mark I hoped everyone else would maintain, and I don't mean this in a confrontational sense: What does it mean when people say things like this? I mean you notified people of the move, right? You presumably sent out resumes, went on interviews, etc. How would it be reflected that your desires weren't "in line"?

Scott Wrote - Today @ 08:00:33 PM
If Reggie White claimed that God told him to play for the Green Bay Packers, it's because a), he's a football player, so it's not all that crazy for him to claim that he is being led to play for a certain team, and b) he saw a young team and a small community, and a place to further what he saw was God's plan (at least one player that I know of became a pastor in part because of Reggie's influence).


Is that really inherently less crazy? A football player believes God told him to go to a specific city to play football. (It was a sheer coincidence that Green Bay was also the highest bidder, I'm sure.) I mean I know what you're saying. This dude was crazy because he was crazy, God is just a name people drop, I just find it interesting that if psycho murder man thinks God is talking to him he is a lunatic hearing voices, meanwhile a large percentage of the population thinks God dictates everything as part of a master plan (which would include psycho murderers), and claim to speak with him often.

craig Wrote - Today @ 08:52:57 PM
Matthew 16:28 states, "Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here...


Up until now I had no idea Matthew was a Shakespearean pirate.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Jeremy perfected this 4 times, last at 03/05/2009 11:35:28 pm
face.bmpCarlos44ec - 2078 Posts
03/06/2009 @ 08:31:07 AM
 Quote this comment
Did the crazyperson in question identify what "god" he was talking about or are you immediately assuming the Christian God?
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
images.jpgcraig - 131 Posts
03/06/2009 @ 10:18:19 AM
 Quote this comment
Carlos44ec Wrote - Today @ 08:31:07 AM
Did the crazyperson in question identify what "god" he was talking about or are you immediately assuming the Christian God?


I asked God about that he said: "I am the first and I am the last, And there is no God besides Me." (Isaiah 44:6) so that settles it. It doesn't really matter which god this one specific CPIQ thought was talking to him, there are plenty of people who do awful things that do believe the Christian God is doing the talking.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Total:

Rated 1 times.
face.bmpCarlos44ec - ...and Bob's your Uncle!
03/06/2009 @ 02:09:05 PM
 Quote this comment
all I'm saying is that you shouldn't necessarily assume that they're talking about the god of the christians- he could possibly have been talking to Mithras or Vishnu, rendering your gospel references moot.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
goodlooking.jpgcraig - 131 Posts
03/06/2009 @ 03:48:18 PM
 Quote this comment
Carlos44ec Wrote - Today @ 02:09:05 PM
all I'm saying is that you shouldn't necessarily assume that they're talking about the god of the christians- he could possibly have been talking to Mithras or Vishnu, rendering your gospel references moot.


I don't see how it makes any difference, Jeremy's point is the whole phenomenon of God (the christian one) talking to people, the specific god in this one particular case is irrelevant to his point.
Rate this comment
Yours:

Rated 0 times.
Leave a Comment of your very own
Name:
Comment:
Verify this code
Verify the Code in this box, or sign in, to post a comment.
click me!
There's an emoticon for how you feel!
click me!
My Files
Sign up, or login, to be able to upload files for Nutcan.com users to see.