Robert Latimer
- Thread starter Said1
- Start date
Finally, by ye all of one mind, having compassion one of another, love as brethren, be pitiful, be courteous: Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing.
Source: I Peter (ch. III, v. 8-9)
Source: I Peter (ch. III, v. 8-9)
No, he should be given a medal. The quacks that use people with illnesses as Guinea pigs should be left in a cell to rot. Along with all the religious bleeding hearts that protect them.
Let me know when you are prepared to walk the main street of Wilkie Sask. hollering that out and I'll be there at the end of the street with $100 if you can make it that far. I suggest maybe you wear some body armour. :lol:
Yes, I know about that, you can't spend a life immersed in science as I have without coming across people like Lemaitre and Teilhard de Chardin. But if they'd really understood what developing critical reasoning means and applied it to their Roman Catholicism with the same rigour they applied it to their sciences, they'd have seen how corrosive it is to religious belief, and if they were intellectually honest they'd have abandoned it.
Nice to be compared to a clever polemicist like Chesterton, but the comment's not really relevant. Atheists don't believe in nothing, they just don't believe in any deities. And you want to talk about death cults, look at Christianity. Its focus is on the hypothesized (with no supporting evidence) next life and how to get there in good shape, not making the best of this one. It glorifies death as the entrance to that next life, it teaches that a man had to die horribly to make that possible, and offers him as the scapegoat for all of our transgressions, thus ultimately absolving us of responsibility for them. It teaches that suffering is good for you, it has redemptive value, brownie points with the celestial dictator who watches everything we do and judges us worthy of joining him or being condemned to the flames for all time. At best I find that a pathetically childish view, at worst it's repulsively immoral. As Christopher Hitchens put it, God created us sick (original sin), commands us to be well, and condemns us if we fail. And that's why I reject it all. I find it to be intellectually dishonest and morally repugnant. And it's also why I will generally reject as invalid any argument based on a religious position. It just does not have the ring of truth, evidence, and reason about it.
Dealing with some the names you've posted here. I'm not sure Teilhard de Chardin was even Christian. His bizarre concoctions trying the reconcile Darwinism with Christianity seemed to have discredited both, while finally wandering into some strange 'noosphere' destiny, presumably to integrate Carl Jung's more outlandish theories into the mix. The Church ultimately silenced him, essentially preventing him from using the pulpit to legitimize his wild New Age speculation as authentic theology, until they were published in bulk after his death.
You should read Christopher Hitchens' latest, and perhaps last, book, Hitch 22. It is a saga of disillusionment with all of his poltical associations, Marxism, then socialism, then neoconservatism. You can glean though that it is filled with religious references. Hitchens is obsessed with religion, it defines him, he seems desperately clinging to his atheism as an empty leaking life raft.. the last refuge of a deeply angry and unfulfilled intellect. Now battling cancer of the esophagus, he seems less and less sure of his position. His book God is Not Great is a very conventional and superficial litany of supposed contradictions and evil intentions of religion, while providing absolutely nothing constructive in its place.. except an abiding skepticism of all allusions to the supernatural.. thence all purpose and structure. It prov
Religion is inevitable. No society or civilization has ever developed that does not have religion at its core, as its root. What you should be worried about is Truth, and you will never find that in Atheism. That has never explained anything. It an exercize in circular and reductive logic, without a beginning or an end, deeply irrational, it is in fact an absurdity unto itself. No religion except Christianity has girded itself so completely with reason. It is bound by reason, its God binds himself with reason, which is why it is so utterly unique in its conception of God and man's relationship with him. How little, Dexter, you seem to understand of it.
Last edited:
Your brand is no more reasoned than Judaism, Islam, Zoroastrianism, or any of the other brands out there. You speak of those without religion as circular reasoning, but yet you prefer answers that revert to a creator, who is also without explanation. That is not reasoned, that is circular logic. You say it's reasoned because your god is bound to reason, but that's not explaining anything. That is the very definition of circular logic.
[
But he did own up, a real criminal would have lawyer'ed up instead. A real criminal would have been out on parole long before Robert Latimer as well.
I don't know where the italicised text comes from, maybe it is from your own thoughts. I will tell you, as a person who has cheated death more than a few times that Tracy Latimer would have not experienced an agonized demise. I have suffered accidental CO poisoning three times and you can rest assured that there is no suffering, except during the recovery if you manage to survive. If I wanted to plan a way out, CO would be it; cancer, hypothermia, falling from tall structures and such are a bitch, yeah they happened to me, I've been shot at but never been hit so I can't talk about GSW's. People who have never lived on the sharp edge are usually the ones who judge the harshest.
But he did own up, a real criminal would have lawyer'ed up instead. A real criminal would have been out on parole long before Robert Latimer as well.
I don't know where the italicised text comes from, maybe it is from your own thoughts. I will tell you, as a person who has cheated death more than a few times that Tracy Latimer would have not experienced an agonized demise. I have suffered accidental CO poisoning three times and you can rest assured that there is no suffering, except during the recovery if you manage to survive. If I wanted to plan a way out, CO would be it; cancer, hypothermia, falling from tall structures and such are a bitch, yeah they happened to me, I've been shot at but never been hit so I can't talk about GSW's. People who have never lived on the sharp edge are usually the ones who judge the harshest.
The italicized words were not my own, i used it as a device to separate my thoughts from quotes, since quotations are limited in length on this forum. My intent in providing it was to take out some of the romantic pretense and sentiment that has surrounded this case. This was a hard brutal crime inflicted on a child. There was no dignity or mercy associated with it, just self interest.. and cowardice.. on Robert Latimer's part in abandoning his responsibility as a parent.
You are probably right in saying that many hardened criminals have spent less time is prison, but usually child murderers, even in the lenience of the Canadian justice system, are given maximum sentences. I suppose given the vocal advocacy of euthenasia groups, i'm surprised that he in fact spent 10 years in prison, even if the 2nd degree compromised on the facts of the charge, and devalued the life Tracy to a commodity in a political agenda. But, imho, that sentence saved the lives of some children that were as vulnerable as Tracy from a sociopathic parent intent on 'ending their child's suffering' and thereby reducing their own burden.
You don't know me, bob, and it is dangerous to make assumptions on the origin of opinions without that knowledge, but i know justice is not a subjective matter. It's application is made from objective standards, not personal experience. In fact every effort is made in selecting jurors who would be prejudiced either way by experience, from an objective weighing of the facts presented to them, by the standards set by LAW.
Last edited:
Did you know Latimer any better? Judging is easy- being right is a little more difficult. :smile:
If he is your idea of a hero, you are a sad individual...
I take it the town is full of nuts??
I see your avatar says "genius"- hate to think what you'd be like if it said "imbecile". :lol: