Tuesday, October 11, 2005

The powers of the state

Tough issue. I do think she should be allowed to keep the baby. And that she's naive. Let's analyze her argument logically:

If he was this miserable monster, I wouldn't be able to close my eyes at night.
I can close my eyes at night.
Therefore, he's not a miserable monster.

If A, then B.
Not B.
Therefore, not A.

It checks out!

4 Comments:

At 1:31 PM, Blogger Jackscolon said...

You know what doesn't check out? Being charged with rape and attempted rape along with sodomy and attempted sodomy. Either he did or he didn't!

 
At 7:43 PM, Blogger RedHurt said...

it IS a tough issue, but it seems like they could just follow the normal operating procedures for a child in an abuse and neglect case. here in colorado, when a child comes under the custody of social services, the goal is always to reunify the child with the parents if possible. The parents are given treatment plans which include therapy, counseling and classes to deal with their specific troubles, and if they comply they get their kids back. If the state is worried about this guy, it would be consistent to put him through sex-offender rehab and if he complies then leave him alone.

I think taking the baby away would be too extreme. I think putting him in classes now 20 years after his crime would be too extreme also. It wouldn't be out of the question to require them to check in with a social worker once a month or something more like parol, but extending the punishment for crimes he's already served for is unjust.

 
At 7:44 PM, Blogger RedHurt said...

rape and attempted rape are different charges. They probably hit him with both hoping something would stick and not being absolutely sure that both would. "Attempted" doesn't mean "failed."

 
At 10:01 AM, Blogger Mair said...

What struck me as really strange is that the woman lives with her dad...and her husband lives somewhere else???? That's weird...what's going on???

 

Post a Comment

<< Home