Justice Kennedy Screws the Children
by Big Dog on Jun 25, 2008 at 20:08 General
Ronald Reagan’s second mistake, Justice Anthony Kennedy (the first was Sandra Day O’Connor), put the screws to children who are victims of rape. Kennedy, who is the swing vote in many close decisions, decided that the crime of raping a child is not worthy of the death penalty thereby ensuring that those who rape children will live their lives cared for in jails at taxpayer expense (and possibly be released) while the victims will live their lives with emotional and psychological damage.
To Kennedy and the other liberals on the court (he might as well be one, he acts like it) there are no crimes that warrant the death penalty except murder and many of them oppose it in that case as well. To them, raping a child is something that should be punished with jail time which means anything short of life without parole would allow the offender to gain freedom and rape again. Justice Alito wrote the dissenting opinion. Here is part of it and it makes the most sense:
“The Court today holds that the Eighth Amendment categorically prohibits the imposition of the death penalty for the crime of raping a child. This is so, according to the Court, no matter how young the child, no matter how many times the child is raped, no matter how many children the perpetrator rapes, no matter how sadistic the crime, no matter how much physical or psychological trauma is inflicted, and no matter how heinous the perpetrator’s prior criminal record may be. The Court provides two reasons for this sweeping conclusion: First, the Court claims to have identified “a national consensus” that the death penalty is never acceptable for the rape of a child;second, the Court concludes, based on its “independent judgment,” that imposing the death penalty for child rape is inconsistent with “‘the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.’” Ante, at 8, 15, 16 (citation omitted). Because neither of these justifications is sound, I respectfully dissent.”
If a person who rapes a child is released and rapes again I assume that the flawed opinion of Kennedy and the others will be little consolation to the victim and his parents. I think if a person who rapes a child (in a state that had the death penalty for the offense) is released and rapes another child, the members of the court who allowed it should be hanged in front of the Supreme Court building. The idea is for laws to protect the public and this ruling does nothing to accomplish that. If it were my child they might not make it to the hanging.
While I am disgusted with the ruling in this case I actually have no feeling one way or the other about putting a criminal to death for raping a child because that can be accomplished anywhere regardless of what the court says. When the animal is sent to jail put him in the general population and let them know what he is in for. He will be killed in jail and the problem will be solved and with no appeals.
I cannot imagine what children must go through after they are raped and it is just as hard on the families. It makes it even harder when the courts rule that the criminal somehow has more rights than the victim. The criminal must be afforded a stretch of the VIIIth Amendment to stay alive while a child, who was subjected to cruel and unusual punishment at the hands of the attacker, must go through life bearing the scars. If some person who raped a child were released I would not blame any victim’s father who decided to remove the trash from this Earth. If I were on that jury he would walk away a free man.
Kennedy and the others are worried about cruel and unusual punishment. The death penalty is too good for these scumbags. They should be hanged, drawn and quartered (the criminals, not the justices, though that might not be a bad idea).
America, these justices are no where as liberal as those Barack Obama will appoint if he becomes president. There will likely be a few openings in the next president’s term. It is important that those positions are filled with justices who will not use public sentiment and personal feelings when interpreting the Constitution. We need more like those who were in the minority on this vote.
Be careful how you vote. Your vote has many more consequences than just putting someone in office.
Hugh Hewitt
Yahoo
Big Dog Salute to Donald Kochan
Tags: anthony kennedy, child rapists, death penalty, rapists, scumbags, supreme court
There is a difference between murder and killing. One is justified. If some pervert like say, Meathead touched one of my kids I would put a bullet between his eyes without a second thought.
Thanks BD. Michael Savage got me really spun up about this, then when I got home, your post was in my inbox. I cross posted to my weblogs. Have a good day my friend. Because of the Supreme Court, the victims of abuses will not have a good day and that asswipe, Massachusetts Rep. James Fagan is another tin hat that needs to be locked up. Fagan is under fire for saying that mandatory sentences would lead him and other defense attorneys to “ruin the lives” of alleged victims of child rape.
Bosuns last blog post..US Mayors Nix Bottled Water
[…] Justice Kennedy Screws the Children […]
[…] This mirror of Big Dog’s post at the time I sent the trackback shows how it appeared just after the trackback was posted. Big Dog, of course, can’t tolerate anyone telling the truth about his lack of moral intelligence, so he has altered the trackback: […]
You know, BD, it just floors me that the justices seem to be so far removed from reality that they cannot stir up enough moral indignation to uphold laws passed by residents of Louisiana. No, they’re so concerned with their relativistic “feel-good-ism” that they uphold criminals’ “rights” over those of the victim.
I know a lot of people are advocating that this monster who raped his step-daughter ought to be sentenced to life without parole and then placed in the prison’s general population, but – though I do see the vengeful attraction of that idea – I would consider that torture. And, one does not torture a rabid animal; one simply puts it down.
Does that make me bloodthirsty? Well, perhaps. But while some might think that’s my attitude, they’re not quite correct. I serve (imperfectly, I confess) a holy and perfect God who hates sin and abhors violence against innocents. While He certainly offers His grace and mercy to ALL who will come to Him, He does not always take away the earthly consequences of the sins we commit.
Therefore, by making this decision, I believe that the justices on the Supreme Court have trampled earthly law and subverted God’s will. I bear the rapist no personal enmity, but his crime is so heinous and at odds with the moral foundation of our society that I cannot see any other appropriate consequence to his actions than the death penalty. I hope that he comes to true repentance and faith whatever happens, but to implicitly minimize the severity of his crime by removing the death penalty does NO ONE in our culture a favor.
It is a shame to all of us as well as a stain on our national character that Justice Kennedy and others like him resort to moral relativism and take the cowardly route.
Kats last blog post..Child rapists deserve to live… (UPDATED and BUMPED)
People seem to have a hang up on the Christians. If we say that someone should die for something then our moral authority and our beliefs are challenged, often by the same people who excuse Muslim beheadings because they are a religion of peace.
The irony is that people who are professional writers lack the ability to see rhetoric. Yes, I believe if a child is raped by a repeat offender who benefited from the ruling the justices should be hanged. That would be appropriate. Do I expect that to happen, no. I am serious when I say that I would shoot anyone who harmed my children or grandchildren (or any other family member for that matter). Rhetoric also says they might not make it to the hanging if it were my family member. In reality, I would go after the criminal and work to impeach the judge. The problem is, some people lack the ability to understand these things.
God made a distinction between killing (a justifiable act) and murder (a crime). Most of the justices who ruled against the death penalty are too old to have young children but I honestly believe that if a judge makes a ruling that allows a criminal back on the street then the next time the criminal strikes it should happen to the judge’s family.
Why should anyone else suffer for the stupidity of the judge? Like all these judges that keep letting child molesters out of jail and the next time the molester strikes he kills a kid. That should be the judge’s kid, not yours or mine, so the judge is made to pay for his decision.
There are people who should die for what they have done. If others don’t like it then perhaps we can make a ruling that they have to take the criminals in and let them live in their homes.
[…] UPDATE 06/25/08 9:24 PM EDT: Oh, lookie… Moral cretin Big Dog is another faux-”Christian” who slavers over the thought of committing murder: […]
If anyone can show me where I said I wanted to exact revenge by murdering children I would appreciate it. The reality it the moron known as Meathead is incapable of a normal discussion. He puts words in people’s mouths and he misquotes them. I stated quite clearly that if a rapist or murderer (of children) is released and commits another crime that crime should be against the judge’s family, not mine or yours. I never want to see children hurt but if it is between mine and the judge;’s let his kid get hurt, he caused the problem.
Meaty is a moron who has no morality, no sense of fairness and no common sense. But Meaty, if you want to show us how stand up you are go to the site GM Roper pointed out and bash the guy who wants Scalia killed.
I bet you will not do it because when left wing nut jobs do it, it is OK with morons like you.