XPost: alt.activism.death-penalty, talk.politics, alt.law-enforcement   
   XPost: alt.true-crime   
   From: abcxyz@zbqytr.ykq   
      
   On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 05:47:03 GMT, Pavel Brown    
   wrote:   
      
   >In article ,   
   > A Planet Visitor  wrote:   
   >   
   >   
   >> Yes... it is.  You claim that you gained 'maturity,' while I find you lost   
   >> your sense of moral direction.   
   >   
   >Moral direction???  Whose morality? What definition of morality? The   
   >Catholic or Judaic? English or American? Japanese or Australian? The   
   >morality that says I must not wear bright clothing, or that which   
   >restricts me from performing third trimester abortions? The morality   
   >that restricts me from copulating with my own gender, or that which   
   >prohibits me from doing so only if my partner is under 16? Honestly   
   >friend, morality has been simply too relative and infinitely too   
   >variable a concept for me to ascribe to. I did in fact lose my moral   
   >direction... I hope I never again believe to have found it.   
      
   Jesus... but you do go into a juvenile snit for someone presuming to have   
   'gained maturity.'  I was speaking of MY OWN VIEW of 'morality.'  In   
   respect to what "I find."  Morality is, of course, totally subjective.  There   
   is no 'absolute morality.'  A murderer might tell you his murder was moral   
   to HIM.  Saddam might tell you that his mass murders were moral to HIM.   
   "I find" you have lost your sense of 'moral direction,' because you seem to   
   argue that 'maturity' has provided it for you.  It is no different than if I   
   had   
   said -- "I find brunettes to be good looking."  It's a subjective view, and   
   you, or anyone, may find 'brunettes'  to be otherwise.  But what is rather   
   insightful is that you seem to agree with me... that you have no 'moral   
   direction.'  Morality is subjective, but that does not mean it does not   
   define 'right' from 'wrong' in our personal subjectivity when we view the acts   
   of ourselves and of others.  Or have you lost that sense of 'right' from   
   'wrong' that rests in that subjective morality?   
   >   
   > > In my youth... I opposed the DP.  Living a full  life,   
   >> and seeing the depravity that some men exhibit... I find that I gained a bit   
   >> of maturity, myself, and now find the DP is the only respectable course in   
   >> those few instances where my stomach turns at the thought of them drooling   
   >> in their bed each night... reliving the murderous atrocities they committed   
   >> on our fellow man.   
   >   
   >I work in the criminal justice system, with a class of offenders who   
   >cannot be safely serviced in general population; individuals who on a   
   >daily basis discuss the finest details of some of the most horrific acts   
   >you can imagine.   
      
   I'm not in the slightest bit impressed by your close association with killers,   
   finding it possible that in that close association you have blurred the   
   distinction between victim and victimizer.  Please do not presume   
   that your 'connection to murderers,' can justify your opposition to the   
   DP... since it can, as well, work in quite the opposite direction.   
      
   >I know depravity. I have looked depravity squarely in   
   >the eye. I regularly review photographs and police reports which   
   >intimately detail depravity. I know what depravity smells and sounds   
   >like. And friend, believe what you wish... but in my world there is   
   >still no respect in killing.   
   >   
   Boo de fuckin' ho.  Given what you have claimed... why would you   
   presume to justify it, to the extent that those committing such depravities   
   are NEVER subject to the lose of their own lives?  It would seem to   
   me that there is some 'respect' in you for those who kill in such depravity.   
   Certainly a 'respect' for their own lives.  Which you would argue can   
   never be forfeit, even if they personally murder dozens, or if they are   
   totally responsible for the murder of millions.  It's quite easy for you to   
   SAY you do not find 'respect in killing,' but it appears to me that this   
   close association with those who kill has made you part of their   
   'family unit,' which is always opposed to the execution of those in   
   that 'unit,' regardless of the atrocities they commit.  Witness the daughters   
   of Saddam, arguing that their father should only be tried in an "International   
   Court," in order that he not be executed, which would most certainly   
   deny justice to the Iraqi people themselves.   
      
   Do me one favor...  do not presume that your close association with those   
   who murder somehow provides you with a greater insight into proving   
   that the DP is unnecessary.  It does not impress me in the slightest.  In   
   point of fact, it seems to me to be just the opposite.  That this close   
   association would provide a biased and emotional attachment to the   
   victimizer, and a disassociation from the victim.   
      
   Murderers are often skilled pathological liars, representing a real menace to   
   society, and people such as you should never permit themselves to be taken   
   in by them.  They will play on sympathy and hope to create emotional and   
   personal attachments to anyone they believe they might manipulate.  It   
   is a reverse manifestation of Stockholm syndrome experienced by kidnap   
   victims.  Forming emotional attachments and actually becoming sympathetic   
   toward those held in captivity.   
      
   The problem becomes a distortion of judgment.  An inversion of the feeling   
   of one's own self-regard, translated into the gratification of another's   
   self-regard.   
   You need to separate YOUR feelings in respect to murder, from THEIR feelings   
   in respect to murder.  And not try to 'put yourself in their place,' since   
   they have   
   murdered... and you have not.  It appears to me that you are continually   
   assailed   
   by the self-justifications that murderers often present, to the point that you   
   now   
   contend that NO murder justifies the loss of the murderer's life.  While   
   factually,   
   human deeds often have vast repercussions, and carry appropriate consequences.   
      
   >> Nor do I find that we serve any 'moral' purpose for either   
   >> ourselves or for them by insisting we cage them for the rest of their life.   
   >   
   >I don't much care to support anyone's concept of morality.   
      
   I never presumed that you did.  Your support seems to me to lie with   
   victimizers.  But I must concern myself with MY OWN concept of morality.   
   While you obviously cannot impose a different view on me.  The fact that   
   you state that you did in fact lose your moral direction... and hope to never   
   again believe to find it, says more about you, and your opposition to the   
   DP, than I could ever convey, in this inadequate forum.   
      
   >I am concerned with creating a safer and more responsible community.   
      
   I don't believe that for a single moment.  Once again you seem to be   
   'using' an argument which has no real validity.  There is absolutely no   
   rational argument that abolishing the DP creates a safer and more   
   responsible community.  Safer and more responsible communities can   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)