My TV cable is down and it’s just as well. Reading about the student shootings at Northern Illinois University is bad enough. I don’t need to see the ghoulish interviews with traumatized survivors…in Hi Def.
And then, of course, there was the Oxnard student shooting.
On February 12 at around 8:30 in the morning, Oxnard 8th grader Brandon McInerney showed up at first period English at E.O. Green Junior High, pulled out a pistol, and shot 15-year old Lawrence King in the head. Classmates said the two boys had gotten into a conflict the day before. It seemed to somehow relate to the fact that King, a foster child living in a group home for abused and neglected children, had recently declared himself to be gay and had been coming to school wearing make-up, high heeled boots and jewelry.
McInerney, the shooter, may not have lived in an ideal household either. In recent years, his father had done jail time for domestic abuse and drunk driving.
And, by the way, where did the kid get that gun?
Oh, yes, and where were were the adults when King was being routinely harassed by a group of the eighth grade boys? Didn’t the school counselors know that a kid thought to be gay was five times as likely to be threatened or injured by a weapon than a straight kid? Or how about the figure that transgender people in the United States have a one in 12 chance of being murdered? One in twelve!
(A hearty thank you to all the Jerry Fallwells of the world for their years of poisonous rhetoric.)
King was declared brain dead on Wednesday. Now it seems that the Ventura prosecutor has decided to try Mcinerney as an adult for King’s murder—and not just any murder, a hate crime. The prosecutor is able to do so because Brandon McInerney turned fourteen three weeks ago and a kid has to be fourteen before you can haul him or her into adult court. In other words, if McInerny had managed to get hold of a hand gun to blow away his classmate four weeks ago, instead of this week, the case would be tried in juvenile court instead.
Adult court means that, if convicted, McInerney will get a minimum sentence of 50-to-life (25 for the murder, 25 for the gun use), likely longer, if the hate “enhancement” is added in. In California that means he’ll get out of prison…well…never.
And what exactly have will we have accomplished?
As if to answer, a day after the shooting the Illinois Coalition For Fair Sentencing of Children released a report about the fallacies of the policy of sentencing children in adult court.
In its executive summary the report mentions the fact that the United States is only one of two countries that still sends teenagers to prison for life. As of right right now, we’re incarcerating 2380 people who were sentenced as kids. The rest of the world combined has….. seven.
Bravo. Great system. Let no child be left behind.
Celeste: (A hearty thank you to all the Jerry Fallwells of the world for their years of poisonous rhetoric.)
So, Celeste opposes freedom of speech if she doesn’t like the message, but she can characterize a sincerely held belief by a Christian minister as poisonous. Plus, isn’t it really, and I mean REALLY, stupid to condemn Christians for the act of this boy? There were dynamics far beyond Christian morality and God’s word in play; and, admit it, you don’t know what was wrong with the murderer (or should I say alleged murderer?).
When I was young, if a kid wanted to act and dress like a girl, then he was going to catch hell from a lot of other boys, and that was before Falwell. It’s just part of how many adolesecents think.
Celeste, your cause and effect theory is all wrong, your views on freedom are not what our Constitution says, and you have a lot of nerve saying that Christian preaching is to blame.
In addition, “hate crimes” are simply wrong and they are bad laws. Hate crimes are thought crimes, pure and simple, and selectively designed to protect politically influential groups. But, in the case of the murdered, dead is dead, and it doesn’t matter why some people think it occurred.
A black man who robs a wealthy white man isn’t going to get more time because he “hates the rich.” You should not be selective in what is a hate thought, so, rather than make it all, make it nothing.
I’m surprised that you haven’t blamed the gun yet. If only we could void the second amendment, then you believe that there won’t be any illegal guns out there. Admit it.
What’s tragic is that a young man’s life is cut short. What’s sad is that left-wingers care more about making political statements about it than in mourning the death. Come to think of it, they do they same with our war dead.
The only thing worse than holding onto conservative principles is to degenerate further with liberal ones that destroy freedom, life, and prosperity.
As far as sending the “alleged” killer to adult court, I’m indifferent, but I sure don’t want to base our policy on what the rest of the world does. Maybe you should look at what the rest of the world does on other things before you say we should copy them.
Good grief. I have work to do. Have a nice day!! 🙂
“So, Celeste opposes freedom of speech if she doesn’t like the message, but she can characterize a sincerely held belief by a Christian minister as poisonous. Plus, isn’t it really, and I mean REALLY, stupid to condemn Christians for the act of this boy?”
I probably shouldn’t bother to write this, but I’m trying to figure out how criticizing the public positions of some unhinged asshole is “opposing free speech.” It could be argued that Woody is the one who “opposes freedom of speech” here, but I don’t want to get into a game of circular stupidity. It should also be noted that sincerity of belief isn’t a measure of its toxicity or lack thereof. I’d cite the “sincerity” of the crazy guy with the funny little mustache and his nasty ideas to reinforce the obvious…but I’ll pass on the temptation, if for no other reason than Woody would argue that by criticizing Cal Thomas I’m attacking all “Christians.” Another logical fallacy. I invoked the concept of rhetorical “malpractice” the other day and Woody manages to up the ante on that endeavor with the comment above.
“A black man who robs a wealthy white man isn’t going to get more time because he ‘hates the rich.'”
Without getting in a discussion of hate crimes law, which I actually agree can be problematic, I’ll suggest that a “black man who robs a wealthy white man” is more than likely doing it not because he “hates the rich” but because he loves the money.
At least reg’s personal attacks have stepped up in sophistication by dropping all the expletives, even if his reasoning is flawed.
Only a moronic dirtbag would suggest that my reasoning is flawed.
reg is guilty of hate speech against moronic dirtbags.
Heartbreaking all around – and maddening and, yes, angry-making.
Well, that’s one of the reasons that “Hate Crime” enhancements are bad public policy. Since we’ve basically given up on anyone under the age of eightteen that shows serious problems I suppose warehousing them is better than executing them – but not by much.
Anyway I’ll look forward to the inevitable “Law and Order” episode that will simplify this out of all proportion. And then there’s Nancy Grace . . .
(please note that no one will discuss the epidemic of handguns. When a nut in Britain shot up a school the law and order Thatcher Govt passed a bill banning all but .22 target pistols in private hands. Funny but that was a government that called itself “Conservative”. Guess that meant conserving lives.)
About the ilk of Fallwell and freedom of speech: If Jesus came back to earth today, there’s no doubt in my mind where he’d be standing: next to these kids, the dead kid who wore high heels,who said he never felt he had a home until this group home for abused children, and the kid now on suicide watch at Ventura County juvenile detention center. He’d stand next to kids like them And next to the despised and thrown away. That’s why, when it comes to right wing Christians, I give all respect to Chuck Colson. He may not be perfect (few of us are), but he’s doing God’s work for real. He walks where Jesus would walk.
There goes Celeste again, defending another “Tinky Winky” gay Tele-Tubbie and besmirching one of America’s favorite televangelists.
Falwell and his ilk were the modern day version of the Pharisees. Nothing more.
It’s great when non-Christians say what Jesus would do, which is anything to suit their purposes. Jesus loves everyone, died for their sins, and wants people to give up sinful ways. But, someone who intentionally continues to sin, flaunts his sin, and rejects God’s guidance is walking away from Him, when God is trying to stand beside that person.
Note, however, that Christians don’t condone hanging homosexuals as is done in the Islamic faith. (Remember, there are “no homosexuals in Iran.”) Left-wing outrage is reserved for Christians rather than the murdering Muslims. Sort of a double-standard, huh?
And, Christians aren’t right-wing or left-wing. They are Christians. Attaching labels to them is a low-class attack on an entire religion that has given much charity throughout the world to people of all or no faiths. Believe me, a lot more murders are committed by non-believers than those who attend church regularly.
Here’s the solution of some gays to attacks: http://pinkpistols.org/ . Now, let’s hear your outrage about an “eye-for-an-eye.”
Where were the adults? Playing cops and robbers. LINK
It’s great when non-Christians say what Jesus would do, which is anything to suit their purposes.
Woody, if you meant me, you’re merely demonstrating your own cluelessness. I’m a Roman Catholic who attends mass regularly. I wish more self-proclaimed, chest-thumping Christians would read the Gospel According to Matthew.
Much as I could never stand Falwell, with his straight and narrow interpretation of who’s a “good Christian,” and I loathe Pat Roberton, this seems to be caused by a conformity and homophobia that has many layers and can’t be pinned on Jerry Falwell or Christian right-wingers. There are many “mainline Protestants” including Presbyterians, Lutherans and Episcopalians who abhor everything Falwell/Robertson stand for, too
(Woody, you may know a different kind of Presbyterian down there — when I attended a Presb. church in an Atlanta suburb, I was shocked to find it was exactly the opposite of the “original” Presb. churches started in New England by Scottish descendants. These Southern Presb. churches deny evolution and preach creationism, the “obedience” of woman to their husbands like all people must obey G-d — pretty convenient for the guys, to have the church force the little wife into subservience — etc.)
But I reserve my special loathing for Falwell’s spiritual kin Robertson because of the kind of thing he said a few years back, on a New Year’s Eve show with Larry King, where he joined Catholic and Muslim spiritual leaders, and the Dalai Lama, in offering their New Year’s wishes and hopes.
“Who cares what the Dalai Lama thinks,” he sneered with a grin. “The only thing that matters is what Jesus says.”
Still, they can’t be blamed for this, and there’s no report or evidence that the shooter and his family were right-wing Christians. This was a case of adults who failed the kids, and who apparently accepting bullying as a fact of life.
This is what happens when a parent does not parent his kid.
In todays world I’ve seen the pendulum swing to much in favor of the spoiled and smart-ass kid. A Baltimore cop schooling a smart-ass 14yr old kid.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hxOr3q7nrk
‘
Randy, I wasn’t making reference to you as a non-Christian ot to you at all. But, here’s a song for you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRwwYWlbP2U
WBC, is correct that this isn’t an issue to blame on television evangelists, as was done within the post.
WBC, I’m a Presbyterian and haven’t seen what you say in my church. In fact, I’ve complained that the Presbyterian USA has become an advocate for left-wing movements–like thinking that women are equal. You probably belonged to Perimeter, which is more of an evalgelical Protestant church and is part of the PCA. If so, I probably know a lot of the same people as you.
L.A. Res, if that policeman was talking that way to my son, then he would soon be talking to me with his superior and next to the unemployment office. The abuse that kid received would be mild to the abuse that officer would get. There’s no excuse for that.
Woody won’t tell you so I will. The reason that there are SOUTHERN Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist congregation is simple. Those sects broke with their Northern Brethern over the issue of slavery. The Southerners found biblical support for slavery just as they would later see Apartheid (i.e. “Segregation”) justified by “God’s Word”.
At least the Anglican Communion admits its origins in Henry VIII’s need for a male heir and the refusal of the Pope (under threat from Spain) of granting a dissolution of his marraige to Catherine of Aragon.
rlc, won’t tell you, so I will.
The Southern Prebyterians (U.S.) and the Northern Prebyterians (U.S.A.) merged in the 1970’s. It’s interesting that you rank the Northern Churches as morally sound, because, although those churches supported abolition, the Northerners did not consider the black man as their equal–and did not until the civil right movements of the 1960’s and 70’s.
My family nor I ever belonged to a domination that excused slavery or racism. We just think that liberals are stupid.
Woody, I was just visiting a southern Presbyterian church where that mentality was the case, and I didn’t find it out until after I was there. I was raised in a mainline Presb. church, which is considered too liberal by some and there is a breakaway movement that’s taken hold particularly in the south but also elsewhere, including SoCal. I forget what they’re calling themselves, but they have a publication, the Layman, which will give you info. I got on that mailing list somehow, and it’s full of condemnation for the mainline Church over its various sins, like interfaith dialogue, refusal to condemn people who aren’t Christians, and some wacky conventions celebrating “the goddess,” which they claim is more wican than Christian. The one legit grievance against them is they’ve tended to be too pro-Palestinian.
The mainline Church, meanwhile, is battling these churches over who owns their assets when they break from the Presb. Church USA, especially when they stop supporting the Presb. USA’s general fund which goes to “too liberal” programs. Some have no further connection to the mainline Presb. USA.
I finally managed to cancel the “subscription,” but check Online for The Layman and member churches.
I’m well aware the south has both types, and the huge church in downtown Atlanta is mainline, and largely black, probably supporting Obama. You have to be careful which kind you walk into.
I just did a quick check and sure enough, there is a Layman Online — the Feb. 13 issue features just such a situation as I mentioned, where a church in Omaha is breaking with the Presb. Church USA to join the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, and has reached an agreement to buy its assets for a certain amount upfront with additional payments over 7 years.
These Evangelical churches are also known as “Covenant,” which I now recall included the one I stumbled into by accident, not being aware of this huge division at the time. The Covenant/ Evangelican churches are the fastest growing, by the way, while the mainstream denomination, like the other mainstream churches, has been losing members.
So they didn’t split over slavery way back when?
Nice try.
To be fair Woody I know that these breaks are hard on the family. Why the Church of Rome and the Eastern Chgurchs are still trying let bygones be bygones over the Great Schism of 1054. And what where the issues? I had to look them up but one amounted to Papal claims of Primacy over four eastern Patriarchies. The other was the insertion of “Filoque” Clause in the Nicine creed in 589. It read “we believe in the Holy Sprit as manifested in the Father.” The new wording said “as manifested in the Father and the Son.” Them’s fighting words for the Eastern Churchs (though protestants are just fine with the “new” lingo) and on those hung the split of the eleventh century.
Not quite slavery but people do get all riled by this sort of thing.
sure, ric, you and reg are always right and everyone else is racking their brains trying to be wrong. who gives a damn about the civil war period in context of what’s happening now. All the current divides are theological.
Maybe your Catholic mind is too hung up on the Great Schism of 1054 to be bothered with current realities in a different church. Guess I could try to review the entire history of the Presbyterian church, also known as the Reformed in countries like Holland, going back to Martin Luther and the Reformation. That would no doubt prove very helpful to understanding whether right-wing religion, or Jerry Falwell, can be blamed for the shooting in Oxnard.
Good response, WBC.
rlc, what gets people riled today is whether or not you are considered baptised by total immersion or by sprinkling.
You guys should be watching the NBA Allstar weekend competitions, with the slam dunk contest coming up. A client of mine is one of the commentators. If it hadn’t been for slavery, there wouldn’t be an NBA.
WBC is giving tedium a bad name.
“All the current divides are theological.”
Which is why important theological questions like gay marriage and ordination of gays/women seem to be recurring issues when these controversies transpire. In fact these tensions within many churches have for years been exploited and promoted by an outfit, the Institute on Religion and Democracy, with an overtly political agenda (do the names Fred Barnes, Fr. Richard Neuhaus or Michael Novak ring a bell?) There is nothing inherently out-of-bounds with these disagreements and if someone wants to establish a sect that operates as an exclusive club for folks of like mind, have at it. But let’s not pretend that this stuff is all high-minded theology – or even theological at all in most cases – rather than attempts to define Christianity within the context of very human and historical social and/or political concerns. Gay marriage or ordination of a person of a particular sex or sexual preference is no more a “theological” issue than slavery was. And please don’t tell me it’s all about “biblical teachings” because the typical contemporary Biblical conservative doesn’t adhere to a consistent scriptural literalism. They are picking passages to underline that reinforce chosen beliefs and asserting their own conditional interpretation of a collection of vintage texts (and often without benefit of anything more than a semi-accurate translation written by a committee, albeit a committee with extraordinary literary gifts.)
Every form of barbarism and bigotry known to mankind was, at one time or another in the history of Christianity, rammed down our throats by pious elders, hucksters and raving theocrats as justified by “the word of God.” And they were as often as not nakedly political, preserving social arrangements convenient to these “duly constituted authorities.” Today’s culture wars provide “moral” cover to a crowd, represented by the IRD among others, that concieve of a mode of economic production that didn’t exist when Jesus walked the earth as having some intrinsic connection to their version of “Christianity” and they appear to genuinely believe that human freedom can’t exist without benefit of their particular brand of religiousity. As a rule of thumb, the more self-righteous, dogmatic and exclusive the claims of any particular gang of “Christians”, the more one can rest assured that there’s a special place in Hell reserved for them.
reg: But let’s not pretend that this stuff is all high-minded theology – or even theological at all in most cases – rather than attempts to define Christianity within the context of very human and historical social and/or political concerns.
Correct. Exp. – National Council of Churches
reg: Every form of barbarism and bigotry known to mankind was, at one time or another in the history of Christianity, rammed down our throats by pious elders, hucksters and raving theocrats as justified by “the word of God.â€Â
Misleading. You imply that Christianity is implicated by hucksters. Many evils may have been conducted claiming “the word of God” by people who were not representatives of the Christian faith, but may have falsely claimed to be. Christians don’t behead non-believers but wish to convert them. Your statement might be more corrct if it included all religions or admitted that the Christian tenets said differently or if you left out Christianity altogether.
Getting back to Celeste’s question, “Where were the adults?,” government can’t fix everything or anticipate every nutcase. However, government can create great problems in its efforts, such as “hate crimes and hate speech.” Why “Hate crime” laws would ban Biblical Christianity
Woody,
Your comment immediately preceded my comment and if you had looked harder, you would have noticed that I used the subjunctive (conditional) case (if) and that hardly makes me paranoid.
“Many evils may have been conducted claiming “the word of God†by people who were not representatives of the Christian faith, but may have falsely claimed to be.”
Like the entire church establishment for more than a few centuries. You can’t escape history, no matter how hard you try. I didn’t simply say “Hucksters” of which Christianity has at least it’s fair share. I also said “pious elders”, implying the mainstream and “raving theocrats” which includes a range of guilty parties from the medieval popes and their enforcement apparatus against unbelievers and heretics, to early American puritanism to characters like Falwell and Robertson. And when we’re discussing Christianity, I don’t feel the need to jerk my knee and give equal time to denouncing Islam, which is a relgion I have zero affinity with.
Since you asked, I find contemporary Islam generally far more problematic and offensive in it’s conservative, orthodox and extremist factions than all except the most outlandish extremes of contemporary Christianity. Some of that judgement may be attributable to my (unapologetic) ethnocentrism and deep-rooted Christian sensibilities, but surely an objective, educated case can be made that ultra-orthodox Islam fetishes Islamic “law” over compassion or a reasonably equitable moral sensibility, much like the Pharisees of the New Testament whose “laws” Jesus challenged and the institutional Catholicism which edged even ardent devotees like Martin Luther into schism. So of course things change and broad social changes – social, economic and political – have enormous impact on what have been claimed to be “immutable” truths of “celestial” theology. Today, despite the relative conservatism of the current Pope, Catholicism is theologically and socially a very “polycentric”, dynamic faith which bears little relationship to the era when it was, in fact, simply “The Church.” This, of course, has nothing to do with the prior discussion except as “Look over there” avoidance of dealing with arguments that Woody can’t rationally counter because they are historically accurate.
If I didn’t deal with an argument worthy of countering, let me know. It wasn’t I who tried to tie the murder to Christians. It seems that there is a bigger burden of truth on your side.
Randy, if you weren’t paranoid, you wouldn’t have presumed that I meant you by going into your attack, explanation, and defense. Besides Matthew, do you read other books of the Bible?
“Besides Matthew, do you read other books of the Bible?”
Personally, I’m a big fan of Eccliastes.
Leviticus, not so much. (Although Chapter 19 is pretty good.)
oops – that’s “Ecclesiastes”
In fairness to WBC, I think that “tedium”continues to be the operative mode here.
What Reg said. I also love the Psalms and Proverbs.
Randy, if you weren’t paranoid, you wouldn’t have presumed that I meant you by going into your attack, explanation, and defense.
If you ever had anything intelliegtn to offer, you wouldn’t have to resort to your consistently feeble attempts at humor.
If you had a sense of humor, you would know when I’m trying to be humorous and when I’m not.
reg(at 36): Finally, a glimmer of self-awareness from you. What an insufferable bunch of babble here not worth addressing, as Woody says.
“insufferable babble” – I’d have to say that that qualifies not just as a “glimmer” of self-awareness but a shaft of bright light.
If you had a sense of humor, you would know when I’m trying to be humorous and when I’m not.
I have acknowledged the one time you were actually funny here.
I actually keep track of blue moons, eclipses, and other exceedingly rare occurences.
I would suggest that anyone who seeks an “otherworldly experience” click Woody’s link “National Council of Churches” in #29 above to read about the treasonous worldwide pro-communist, mind-control conspiracy to take over the churches, funded by the Rockefeller family. Even Pastor Rick Warren is implicated. Alarming stuff.
reg, fine. Beleive that the National Council of Churches is mainstream. However, next time that you quote the NY Times and such, be ready to admit that you accept everything else that they say.
Huh ?
reg, more from the author you attempt to disparage….
Transforming the World by Subverting the Church
And it’s… [drum roll]… Woody FTW! With an amazing 33.3% of the posts (15/45)! Almost as impressive as Dwight Howard’s Superman dunk.
The grand prize= a round trip for two to Lynchburg, Virginia, at the Motel 6. Free HBO and nonstop Teletubbies, narrated by Jerry Falwell, postmortem.
Tally Wacker, perhaps you should split the comments into conservative vs. liberal. If there are three liberals to one conservative, then the ratio should be 50:50. As usual, liberal logic is pathetic.
Serial posting is a frightening condition–like diabetes, chronic masturbation, restroom footsie, and being a GOP-supporter. I wish you the best in your ongoing therapy and 12-step program. You can do it!
You must know something from experience.
And the Woody-tally continues its frenetic, OCD-ish pace: 17 and counting! Someone get Guinness!
Your site is also very interesting, very calming effect just reading it. Will spend more time with certain areas. Well done and good luck with your work.