Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: To testify or not to testify!!


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: To testify or not to testify!! Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 9:20:04 PM   
Noah


Posts: 1660
Joined: 7/5/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: missturbation

quote:

You, on the other hand, might rather live in a land which in all ways relents to the pressure to see a vow as nothing more or less than any handshake over the sale of a used car. I dunno.

I never said anything of the sort. I will say marriage vows have become pretty meaningless in my opinion and certainly are not more valuable than a life.


Thanks for clarifying.
 
quote:

quote:

In any case the people whose morals you are swooning in response to, missturbation, don't strike me as toilet-worthy stuff. They strike me as people hewing closely to a set of values which happen to differ from yours.

Yep and as i have already stated i respect they are entitled to their opinions but i dont have to respect said opinion.


Yes. I have heard you each time you've said it. And why am I getting this lecture? Have I indicated any reluctance to consider any opinion yet offered here?

Does my taking the time to imaginatively inhabit their view and to ask you careful questions about your view indicate to you that I am a callous rejecter of people and their opinions?


quote:

quote:

At the very least you must credit them for putting something far more valuable than money where their mouths are.

Maybe more valuable than money but not more valuable than someones life.


Here you are just mistaken. Maybe you didn't quite get the full import of what they had to say. They are making it clear--some of them, anyway--that they are willing to stake human life, their own or someone else's or several lives, for that matter, on their beliefs


quote:

quote:

Kalira says what she says it is clear to me that in return for the chance to live under the legal circumstances at issue she is indeed willing to confront and accept whatever ill consequences might befall her as a result of someone else exercising the right in question.

Yes, but is she also willing to risk the chance of the person she has protected going out and reoffending? Could she live with that on her question? I know only kalira can answer.


missturbation, this whole reoffending thing is by no means built in to your example unless you smuggle it in. There are an infinite number of possible cases in which a person might refrain from testifying against a spouse where there is no reason whatever to believe that reoffense would result. Your spouse apprehends and struggles with the person who tortured, raped, and killed someone precious to both of you. The bad guy dies and your spouse is indicted for murder. Your spouse is in all actuality quite done with the killing phase of his life but you are called upon to give evidence which will in all likelihood be seen as damning to him.

The decision to testify might be different here than if he were a mafia hitman, don't you think? Or is it all black and white?


quote:

quote:

Does that really disgust you?

Yes their loyalty could cost a heavy price.


Yes it could, and they might be the very ones to pay that price, and it seems to me that they have faced all of that.

Please note that one does not have to argue for "loyalty above all" in order to hold out that there might be cases in which they would refrain from testifying against a spouse.

{The sentence: "You're doing a heckuva job, Brownie!" keeps intruding at this point.}

quote:

quote:

You seem to speak only of murder cases, by the way. Does your umbrage stop there or would you have the state compel spousal testimony for every sort of crime, misdemeanor and infraction?

My umbrage as you call it is not aimed at the law but the people who will not stand up for what is right. I spoke of murder because it is a serious crime, it was used as example. There are certain crimes i would not report my loved ones for yes.


If it shouldn't be called umbrage, once again, please clarify. I'd be curious as to why.

Thank you for answering that question about the scope of the issue for you.


quote:

quote:

I'm encouraging you to back up for a bit from your condemnation of them as toilet stuff and try to explore their point of view at least long enough to gain some understanding of it.

I cannot and will not pretend to understand someone who holds human life so low in estimation.


(First let me note that you have explained in a subsequent post that your toilet talk wasn't meant in the way I understood it above. Thanks for clarifying that too.)

Well for heaven's sake. Did someone suggest pretending to understand?

My recommendation was to invest a little effort in understanding their points of view. I'm not at all sure what it means to "understand a person" beyond that. It does seem to me that we can have a better or worser understanding of one another's viewpoints.

We can read in the newspapers about the results of people defining one another as not being worth trying to understand. I don't always enjoy those stories.

The people posting to this thread didn't kill anyone, missturbation (as far as I know.) They hold an opinion about how to behave in a certain eventuality which as it seems to me is astronomically unlikely in the first place--if we stay with the murder theme.

Yeah, Kalira claims to have been in exactly the situation the thread deals with, and maybe she has. And maybe she refused to testify while jumping off a roof to evade killer bees. We can each formulate our opinions about those questions too. I can't wait to see her contributions to a thread about Martian abduction. That said I still credit her for owning up forthrightly to the entailments of the position she took in this thread.

You have been challenged about some of the troubling entailments of the position you have taken and you have not yet owned up to them. I hope you will address those questions from me and others.

Your decision to declare entire human beings as quite beneath being worthy of understanding on the basis of their expression of their opinion on something like this just strikes me as the thing which lies at the heart of radical fundamentalisms of various flavors.

So, no, please don't pretend. And feel free to apportion your energy any way you like. If that budget precludes spending it on understanding the ideas of the other people in this thread (including me,) I support your choice completely. But you needn't make such sweeping moral condemnations to do that.

What I was trying to show you was that a person could oppose you on the particulars at issue here and still hold human life in an estimation exactly as high as yours. They might, as it happens, just hold some other value even higher than you value life or anything else.

But unless you're willing to understand these people we shouldn't be surprised at the consistency with which you demonstrate your misunderstanding of them.

There are some compelling things which could be discussed here if certain people would climb down from ther polemical parapets and mix with those who seem to be trying to just explore the ideas..

(in reply to missturbation)
Profile   Post #: 121
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 9:22:54 PM   
Emperor1956


Posts: 2370
Joined: 11/7/2005
Status: offline 		Hey, folks.  This talk got me thinking, and I posted something here you might want to take a pass at.  And can we try to keep it a bit more civil?  The Atlantic is boiling from these cross oceanic volleys.

E.

< Message edited by Emperor1956 -- 11/18/2006 9:23:28 PM >

_____________________________

"When you wake up, Pooh," said Piglet, "what's the first thing you say?"
"What's for breakfast? What do you say, Piglet?"
"I say, I wonder what's going to happen exciting today?"
Pooh nodded thoughtfully.
"It's the same thing," he said.

(in reply to Noah)
Profile   Post #: 122
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 9:25:54 PM   
corsetgirl


Posts: 824
Joined: 5/22/2004
Status: offline 		Yeah but I thought of Moe from the Simpson's when he tried it win Marge over during her seperation from Homer.
[/quote]

In that case - D'oh!

(in reply to AquaticSub)
Profile   Post #: 123
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 9:32:33 PM   
missturbation


Posts: 8290
Joined: 2/12/2006
From: another planet
Status: offline 		Yes. I have heard you each time you've said it. And why am I getting this lecture? Have I indicated any reluctance to consider any opinion yet offered here?

Does my taking the time to imaginatively inhabit their view and to ask you careful questions about your view indicate to you that I am a callous rejecter of people and their opinions?
Lecture? No i responded to your comment only.
Did i say you had indicated any reluctance?
Did i say you were a callous rejecter?
Did i even imply any of the above?
The answer is no.
 
Here you are just mistaken. Maybe you didn't quite get the full import of what they had to say. They are making it clear--some of them, anyway--that they are willing to stake human life, their own or someone else's or several lives, for that matter, on their beliefs
Mistaken? I think i'm entitled to my opinion that life is more valuable then money. It is my opinion alone.
 
missturbation, this whole reoffending thing is by no means built in to your example unless you smuggle it in.
Read my prior posts i have stated over and over again that someone who is likely to reoffend should not be protected. It was actually a large part of my argument. Living with the chance of another death on someones conscience.
 
There are an infinite number of possible cases in which a person might refrain from testifying against a spouse where there is no reason whatever to believe that reoffense would result.
Again read my posts i have always said there may be circumstances i would not testify. As for no reason to think someone would offend, theres no reason not to either. Would you take that chance?
 
The decision to testify might be different here than if he were a mafia hitman, don't you think? Or is it all black and white
See previous posts regarding circumstance.
 
Well for heaven's sake. Did someone suggest pretending to understand?
No they suggested i should understand.
 
Your decision to declare entire human beings as quite beneath being worthy of understanding on the basis of their expression of their opinion on something like this just strikes me as the thing which lies at the heart of radical fundamentalisms of various flavors.
Please dont put words in my mouth i never said that.
 
You have been challenged about some of the troubling entailments of the position you have taken and you have not yet owned up to them. I hope you will address those questions from me and others.
Troubling entailments?
 
But unless you're willing to understand these people we shouldn't be surprised at the consistency with which you demonstrate your misunderstanding of them.
Hmm - very nice apportion blame - typical.
 


_____________________________

What you don't witness with your eyes, don't witness with your mouth. Proverb.

If it fit's in a toaster, i can cook it.

Buying 10 item's or less is not shopping !!

(in reply to Noah)
Profile   Post #: 124
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 9:33:06 PM   
kajiramre


Posts: 22
Joined: 11/15/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: missturbation

Mist, if I understand your stance, you would testify against your spouse if he committed murder or comparable serious crime under all circumstances
 
Oh look she did say it.
I'm losing patience now.
If you want to pull me for something make it valid.

Obviously, I didn't understand your stance form your earlier posts.  You had not stated a reply to kalira's direct question when I started the post. 

I do agree with Aquaticsub that you are difficult to debate with as I suspect you are going to jump down my throat again, when in reality, maybe we are closer to the same opinion that what I originally thought.  

AS for whether or not I would testify against my Master or not if he committed a serious crime, it would definitely depend on the situation. 

kaji






(in reply to missturbation)
Profile   Post #: 125
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 9:35:49 PM   
missturbation


Posts: 8290
Joined: 2/12/2006
From: another planet
Status: offline 		No, i'm not going to jump down your throat at all.
I'm a little tired of people putting words in my mouth this evening is all.
I apologise for my sharpness with you.
As for your agreeing with aquasub thats fine you are entitled to your opinion but its a shame so many people here are so quick to judge.

_____________________________

What you don't witness with your eyes, don't witness with your mouth. Proverb.

If it fit's in a toaster, i can cook it.

Buying 10 item's or less is not shopping !!

(in reply to kajiramre)
Profile   Post #: 126
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 9:41:57 PM   
UtopianRanger


Posts: 3251
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: missturbation

Apparently in the 1800's it was illegal (certainly in the USA) to testify against your husband in court unless he gave you permission.
Just made me wonder would you testify against a partner or a loved one if it came to it?



I'd lie in a hearbeat to protect my girlfriend /wife. Same for very close friends.



- R

< Message edited by UtopianRanger -- 11/18/2006 9:42:48 PM >

_____________________________

"If you are going to win any battle, you have to do one thing. You have to make the mind run the body. Never let the body tell the mind what to do... the body is never tired if the mind is not tired."

-General George S. Patton


(in reply to missturbation)
Profile   Post #: 127
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 9:43:59 PM   
missturbation


Posts: 8290
Joined: 2/12/2006
From: another planet
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: UtopianRanger

quote:

ORIGINAL: missturbation

Apparently in the 1800's it was illegal (certainly in the USA) to testify against your husband in court unless he gave you permission.
Just made me wonder would you testify against a partner or a loved one if it came to it?



I'd lie in a hearbeat to protect my girlfriend /wife. Same for very close friends.



- R


Even if she was a serial killer?

_____________________________

What you don't witness with your eyes, don't witness with your mouth. Proverb.

If it fit's in a toaster, i can cook it.

Buying 10 item's or less is not shopping !!

(in reply to UtopianRanger)
Profile   Post #: 128
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 9:48:47 PM   
FelinePersuasion


Posts: 4792
Joined: 11/20/2004
Status: offline 		no matter what he did is pretty loyal. Loyalty is important, but his butt would be out of luck  partner of mine molested or killed a child, my child, or raped or killed any one.

Now we all say we know our mates they'd never........ and that's great. It is but if they ever did anything wrongfull harmfull or caused someone elses death on purpose I would not stand behind them.
quote:

ORIGINAL: slavejali

I would never testify against my partner. My first loyalty lays with him, no matter what he did.

(in reply to slavejali)
Profile   Post #: 129
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 10:10:40 PM   
Noah


Posts: 1660
Joined: 7/5/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: missturbation

quote:

Here you are just mistaken. Maybe you didn't quite get the full import of what they had to say. They are making it clear--some of them, anyway--that they are willing to stake human life, their own or someone else's or several lives, for that matter, on their beliefs

Mistaken? I think i'm entitled to my opinion that life is more valuable then money. It is my opinion alone.


Once again you fly past the point. If you'd re-read the relevant texts and say something that indicates that you undrstand what I and others have been trying to say about this I'll be happy to discuss it further. Otherwise I give up on this.

I've always read your posts, whereas there are plennty of people I habitually skip over. Whether or not I agree with you you have seemed a person whose ideas are real worth considering. I have considered yours here today at great length. I'm telling you in all candor that you have missed a crucial point which if you would just review I'm sure you could understand. Why this seemingly rabid refusal to even listen? It seems so unlike the impression of you I have gleaned over many month's time?


quote:

quote:

missturbation, this whole reoffending thing is by no means built in to your example unless you smuggle it in.

Read my prior posts i have stated over and over again that someone who is likely to reoffend should not be protected. It was actually a large part of my argument. Living with the chance of another death on someones conscience.


I applaud you for moving to a more nuanced stance on this since you first introduced the issue of re-offense (as you call it,) but for the record, this is how you intriduced it:

quote:

Well my estimation of you has gone right down the toilet. You'd rather see a murderer walk free to reoffend and they will time and time again to protect your family than protect innocent victims. It's disgusting.


You didn't say "IF" there was a likelihood of reoffending. You declared in no uncertain terms that a murderer who walks free WILL reofend "time and time again".

I don't applaud sliding sneakily from one position to another while pretending the latter position was the one you held all along. There are enough people here who make a habit of that without you starting it too.



quote:

quote:

There are an infinite number of possible cases in which a person might refrain from testifying against a spouse where there is no reason whatever to believe that reoffense would result.

Again read my posts i have always said there may be circumstances i would not testify. As for no reason to think someone would offend, theres no reason not to either. Would you take that chance?


Missturbation, I did my best to accept your hypotheticals and to work with them as such. I have posited a case in which there was no reason to think someone would reoffend, to use your term again.

Now are your hypotheticals rulled in and those of others ruled out? That's not crickett, is it?


quote:

quote:

The decision to testify might be different here than if he were a mafia hitman, don't you think? Or is it all black and white

See previous posts regarding circumstance.

See also previous post where you indicated that any murderer who walked free would necessarily reoffend "time and time again."


quote:

quote:

Well for heaven's sake. Did someone suggest pretending to understand?

No they suggested i should understand.


And that's all you have to say about that?



quote:

quote:

Your decision to declare entire human beings as quite beneath being worthy of understanding on the basis of their expression of their opinion on something like this just strikes me as the thing which lies at the heart of radical fundamentalisms of various flavors.

Please dont put words in my mouth i never said that.


You said: "I cannot and will not pretend to understand someone who holds human life so low in estimation."

The only words I'm putting into your mouth are your own.



quote:

You have been challenged about some of the troubling entailments of the position you have taken and you have not yet owned up to them. I hope you will address those questions from me and others.

Troubling entailments?

Yes. Troublng entailments.


quote:

quote:

But unless you're willing to understand these people we shouldn't be surprised at the consistency with which you demonstrate your misunderstanding of them.

Hmm - very nice apportion blame - typical.


What? Look. In certain parts of this conversation you have misunderstood me again and again, appearing to have not even taken the time to read the present post carefully, never mind refer back to another post to which I referred. As well you have missed a crucial point made by a number of people who hold an opinion opposite to yours. You did it again in the post I'm responding to now. Where else should the blame for that lie, if you want to cast things in terms of blame?

You rant and rant that people are not taking your point but when someone patiently explains that you have missed his you merely sputter and fume and restate your previous misunderstanding with more vituperation. Honestly. If you'd ease off on the defensiveness some productive discussion might ensue.









(in reply to missturbation)
Profile   Post #: 130
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 10:15:04 PM   
UtopianRanger


Posts: 3251
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: missturbation

quote:

ORIGINAL: UtopianRanger

quote:

ORIGINAL: missturbation

Apparently in the 1800's it was illegal (certainly in the USA) to testify against your husband in court unless he gave you permission.
Just made me wonder would you testify against a partner or a loved one if it came to it?



I'd lie in a hearbeat to protect my girlfriend /wife. Same for very close friends.



- R


Even if she was a serial killer?


Heh....That's a mighty extreme example. If she was a serial killer I would turn her in immediately. However, I wouldn't abandon anyone I loved....I'd stick by them and try to get them help.



- R


_____________________________

"If you are going to win any battle, you have to do one thing. You have to make the mind run the body. Never let the body tell the mind what to do... the body is never tired if the mind is not tired."

-General George S. Patton


(in reply to missturbation)
Profile   Post #: 131
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 10:29:00 PM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

I have only read the first 20 or so posts on this thread, but I decided to interject because of the AMAZING amount of complete misinformation that has been posted.


Many thanks for the info!

(in reply to Emperor1956)
Profile   Post #: 132
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 10:31:25 PM   
missturbation


Posts: 8290
Joined: 2/12/2006
From: another planet
Status: offline 		Once again you fly past the point. If you'd re-read the relevant texts and say something that indicates that you undrstand what I and others have been trying to say about this I'll be happy to discuss it further. Otherwise I give up on this.
I understand everything that has been said but that does not mean i have to understand the reasoning behind what people do.
Why this seemingly rabid refusal to even listen?
I have listened and replied honestly to every post made that has asked me to do so.
You didn't say "IF" there was a likelihood of reoffending. You declared in no uncertain terms that a murderer who walks free WILL reofend "time and time again".
I apologised several pages ago for missing out the word maybe in that quote.
don't applaud sliding sneakily from one position to another while pretending the latter position was the one you held all along. There are enough people here who make a habit of that without you starting it too.
It was an unintentional typo.
Missturbation, I did my best to accept your hypotheticals and to work with them as such. I have posited a case in which there was no reason to think someone would reoffend, to use your term again.
Now are your hypotheticals rulled in and those of others ruled out? That's not crickett, is it?
Hypothetically it could go either way, they may reoffend, they may not. I never stated any different intentionally.
And that's all you have to say about that?
I'm not sure what you are looking for here. Understanding what someone says and understanding the reasoning behind it are two different things.
You said: "I cannot and will not pretend to understand someone who holds human life so low in estimation."
The only words I'm putting into your mouth are your own.
With a little extra topping from your imagination yes. Just because i dont, wont understand their reasoning doesnt mean they are beneath it and is not what i said.
Yes. Troublng entailments.
If you elaborate i'll answer.
As well you have missed a crucial point made by a number of people who hold an opinion opposite to yours.
At no point have i missed someones point or opinion. I have merely disagreed.
You rant and rant that people are not taking your point but when someone patiently explains that you have missed his you merely sputter and fume and restate your previous misunderstanding with more vituperation
Same as above except that i have not misunderstood what people have said - again i just dont agree.
Honestly. If you'd ease off on the defensiveness some productive discussion might ensue
I havent once been defensive. Its laughable. I have defended my view point and said time and time again whilst i see others points of view i do not have to respect them or agree with them. Repeatedly i have had reason to take a defensive position in the case of being not read properly, misquoted, words put in my mouth etc etc and all i have done is restate my point. It does get tiring after a while and i have no need for peoples respect over this as i respect my own opinions.
If you'd re-read the relevant texts and say something that indicates that you undrstand what I and others have been trying to say about this I'll be happy to discuss it further. Otherwise I give up on this.
Why dont u tell me what the relevant texts are. As far as i can see it just goes round and round in circles because i won't bow down to the pressure of cm members telling me i have to respect and i have to understand. If i took everything to heart that has been said to me in here tonight id be sobbing my heart out by now.
I stand by my position that where serious crime is concerned and there is a chance of reoffending then i would testify against a loved one. I also stand by that whilst i respect others have a right to their choice i dont have to respect that choice and that although i understand what people have been saying i do not have to understand their actions.


_____________________________

What you don't witness with your eyes, don't witness with your mouth. Proverb.

If it fit's in a toaster, i can cook it.

Buying 10 item's or less is not shopping !!

(in reply to Noah)
Profile   Post #: 133
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 10:33:03 PM   
NeedToUseYou


Posts: 2297
Joined: 12/24/2005
From: None of your business
Status: offline 		General Reply:

Hrmmm, the problem with this thread is a couple have stated flatly they wouldn't testify against a spouse, flat out with any exceptions, at least in there initial posts when the heat started. So, a statement expressed like "I would not testify against a spouse." Covers all possible scenarios. Coming back from a flat out statement like that then posing question against the OP about situations where she might think murder could be condoned is irrelevant since some have stated explicitly that  they wouldn't testify period. So, that would include serial killers, rapists, ect... go crazy with the scenarios. I can only hope the initial statements on the thread were not stated true to what they believed. As in "I would not testify against a spouse except in extreme circumstances like fergus said". I'd assume cold blooded murder would be extreme. But blanket statements that one would never testify, is what the objection is to. Not that there are some extreme violations of law that could be morally condoned.

< Message edited by NeedToUseYou -- 11/18/2006 10:38:02 PM >

(in reply to UtopianRanger)
Profile   Post #: 134
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 10:33:20 PM   
missturbation


Posts: 8290
Joined: 2/12/2006
From: another planet
Status: offline 		Heh....That's a mighty extreme example. If she was a serial killer I would turn her in immediately. However, I wouldn't abandon anyone I loved....I'd stick by them and try to get them help.

It is yes lol.
However it is however rare a possibility.

_____________________________

What you don't witness with your eyes, don't witness with your mouth. Proverb.

If it fit's in a toaster, i can cook it.

Buying 10 item's or less is not shopping !!

(in reply to UtopianRanger)
Profile   Post #: 135
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 10:34:18 PM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

There is much talk of allowing "civil unions" for same sex couples as an equivalent to marriage, but not allowing "marriage" because "marriage" is something supposedly only between a man and a woman.  Well no jurisdiction in the USA (I'm not sure of foreign -- would love to know) which has enacted "civil union" has enacted the concomitant privilege of spousal immunity.  So....first, why do we grant it to M/F marriages but not M/M or F/F?  Second, there is one example of about 400 where "civil union" is inherently NOT equal to marriage.


Thank you for pointing that out!

(in reply to Emperor1956)
Profile   Post #: 136
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 10:38:25 PM   
nefertari


Posts: 425
Joined: 7/22/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: missturbation

Apparently in the 1800's it was illegal (certainly in the USA) to testify against your husband in court unless he gave you permission.
Just made me wonder would you testify against a partner or a loved one if it came to it?


Right is right and wrong is wrong.  I would testify.  If it were one of my children who had committed an egregious crime, I would be heartbroken, but I would testify.  That does not mean I love them any less or am any less loyal.  It means that I place an extremely high value on right vs wrong and anyone who knows me knows that. 

You know, when that reporter spent all that time in jail for contempt for refusing to testify while they were investigating the CIA agent leak (names are escaping me, atm), I had no respect for her.  But I did have contempt for the person who was not freeing her of her commitment to her silence and thus allowing her to stay in jail. 

If someone I loved would allow me to spend time in jail for refusing to testify to the truth, then where is their loyalty to me?

By the way, justice is a myth.

(in reply to missturbation)
Profile   Post #: 137
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 11:15:16 PM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Hey, folks.  This talk got me thinking, and I posted something here you might want to take a pass at.  And can we try to keep it a bit more civil?  The Atlantic is boiling from these cross oceanic volleys.


Fascinating and disturbing hypothetical, Emperor. Thanks!

It's funny: I go long years without remembering that I was ever a Boy Scout (not that I was much of one!), but this is the second CM thread in several days to bring to mind a bit of wisdom I learned back then: Never judge a fellow human until you have walked a mile in his or her moccasins.

My initial reaction to the OP was that I'd find it hard to imagine myself protecting, say, a murderer or a rapist, particularly if there was the possibility that s/he would hurt someone else. Yet I stop short of saying that for sure, because I know that each situation has its nuances, many of which may be invisible to those outside the situation.

For a literary take on this issue, check out "A Jury of Her Peers," a short story by Susan Glaspell.

(in reply to Emperor1956)
Profile   Post #: 138
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/18/2006 11:49:58 PM   
ownedgirlie


Posts: 9184
Joined: 2/5/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice
For a literary take on this issue, check out "A Jury of Her Peers," a short story by Susan Glaspell.

I loved that story.  We dissected it in my Literature class - both the narrative and the play forms.  It was quite interesting. 

(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 139
RE: To testify or not to testify!! - 11/19/2006 2:50:50 AM   
Level


Posts: 25145
Joined: 3/3/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: missturbation

I'm only going to say this once more. I dont respect her choices but i respect her choice to make a choice. I cannot respect something which to me is wrong and won't.


Which is your right, no matter what anyone else says.

_____________________________

Fake the heat and scratch the itch
Skinned up knees and salty lips
Let go it's harder holding on
One more trip and I'll be gone

~~ Stone Temple Pilots

(in reply to missturbation)
Profile   Post #: 140
Page:   <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: To testify or not to testify!! Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094