60 Days Sentence for Child Rape in Vt.

[WIcruizer]

Do you have anything to back this up or is this more sourcing from the back passage?

It's called common sense. I won't keep repeating myself. This is the first time I ever talked to a liberal who wouldn't acknoweldge that liberal judges are...liberal. So I won't debate this further if we can't have an honest discussion.

 

[alliecats]

Do you have anything to back this up or is this more sourcing from the back passage?

 

[cats7494]

Liberal sentencing has been the subject of discussion for many years, I think perhaps you could find it for yourself.

Did not realize I was addressing you.

 

[ford family]

Did not realize I was addressing you.

Oh come on, don't resort to juvenile or scatological responses, please.

We all agree that the judge, in this case, was far too liberal in the way he gave the perpetrator the opportunity to exchange prison time for questionable treatment.

A liberal, by definition, is open to new ideas for progress, tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others and is broad-minded. So, we should expect prominent liberals, members of the legislature or the judiciary for example, to be at the leading edge of those "new ideas for progress". We should, equally, expect the majority of the general public, both conservative and liberal, to disagree with those new ideas, at least in the beginning, and loudly say so.

To criticise this judge because of his liberalism is to criticise an ideology that assumes that new thinking must be good thinking, that change is always good and that something is automatically wrong because it hasn't come from an approved source.

To defend Liberals (note the capital letter), right or wrong, because your perceived enemy is attacking one of your own, not just for what he has done (which you agree is wrong) but because they have the temerity to attach blame to the ideology itself, is flawed.

Liberalism is a slippery slope that ends in anarchy unless common sense prevails and "progress" is halted. In this instance, public interest is best served by everybody agreeing that an error of judgement (no pun intended) has occurred and that changes need to be made to the due process to prevent it happening again.

ford family

 

[cardaway]

I thought people gave up the tired "liberals ares soft on crime" crap long ago. A relic of the "war on drugs" platform.

If not, they should have.

 

[cardaway]

Bingo!! Yep, I'm one of those people as well. Would I be happy about it? Of course not. But to compare a forcible rape with two teenagers whose hormones are out of control is ludicrous and insulting to real rape victims, IMO.

Very insulting and damaging. To the point where one has to look up the details rather than being able to accept that "rape" means rape.

 

[LuvDuke]

It's called common sense. I won't keep repeating myself. This is the first time I ever talked to a liberal who wouldn't acknoweldge that liberal judges are...liberal. So I won't debate this further if we can't have an honest discussion.

I see the answer is back passage. No surprises there.

 

[Charade]

I don't think that's quite true. The only set "liberal agenda" that even exists is in the mind of pied pipers like Sean Hannity who like to inflame their mindless flock of followers by turning every single news story into a political outrage.

Interesting...

People who listen to Hannity, Rush, O'Reilly and such are mindless followers but does that mean those who listen to other "talking heads" like Franken, Rhodes, Stewart and such are enlightened and thinkers?

 

[Charade]

Can you provide more examples of this?
Conservatives giving a "proper" punishment and a liberal giving "improper" punishment?

Typically, conservatives support the death penalty and liberals support life without parole. Conservatives think the death penalty is a "proper" punishment, liberals think it's "improper". And visa versa.

 

[mickeyfan2]

Just received a reply from Senator Don Collins in VT:

I agree that we need minimum sentencing requirements and Senate
Judicicary is going to address this issue. Senator Don Collins

I was surprised to hear back so quickly but am glad the issue will be discussed!

This is good that they are going to address it. I am hoping that many VT voters voiced thier opinions too and that a good law will result from this case.

 

[CheshireVal]

A liberal, by definition, is open to new ideas for progress, tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others and is broad-minded.

So if we're going to slap definitions on people, then we can surmise that conservatives are just the opposite: opposed to progress, intolerant of others, and closed-minded. Sounds like a nice person!

And I don't see anywhere that "liberals are tolerant of pedophiles." Perhaps that ONE judge was way more tolerant than he should have been. And he's a liberal. Based on that evidence alone, however, you absolutely *cannot* conclude that all liberal judges would behave in the same manner. That's one of the most classic logical fallacies out there.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

Of course, but I'm not going to spend the time to do so. Is there really anyone who doesn't believe liberal judges generally give softer sentences? Words mean things. Liberals define themselves as "tolerant." You all embrace liberals o nthe bench until something like this really gets your attention.

Of course your aren't because you can't. You asked if there is anyone who doesn't believe liberal judges generally give softer sentences? I am striving not to use such a broad brush to do a wholesale paint (i.e., smear) job on part of the judiciary, especially based on a disagreement over politics.

Dragging this back to an "us vs. them" political argument completely ignores the real issue here and only pours more fuel on the partisan fires. IOW, it's unproductive and unnecessary.

 

[ford family]

So if we're going to slap definitions on people, then we can surmise that conservatives are just the opposite: opposed to progress, intolerant of others, and closed-minded. Sounds like a nice person!

And I don't see anywhere that "liberals are tolerant of pedophiles." Perhaps that ONE judge was way more tolerant than he should have been. And he's a liberal. Based on that evidence alone, however, you absolutely *cannot* conclude that all liberal judges would behave in the same manner. That's one of the most classic logical fallacies out there.

"We" are not defining anyone, I took the definition from www.dictionary.com.
Why should conservatives be the antonym of liberals, anyway?

Reading is one thing, comprehension another.

ford family

 

[Tigger_Magic]

Liberal sentencing has been the subject of discussion for many years, I think perhaps you could find it for yourself.

Dawn, you practice this same debate technique - demaning evidence for opinions expressed as facts. And you've expressed annoyance when someone pulls the same thing you've done here. So is it OK for "conservatives" to dodge the "provide the evidence" challenge but not OK for "liberals"?

Let's be realistic for a change and understand that everyone needs to play by the same rules. That's a fair and balanced debate.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

It's called common sense. I won't keep repeating myself. This is the first time I ever talked to a liberal who wouldn't acknoweldge that liberal judges are...liberal. So I won't debate this further if we can't have an honest discussion.

No, it's called your opinion until you can provide evidence to prove it is a fact. Opinion does not equal fact -- at least IRL.

 

[lillygator]

Does that give you the right to insult others? Sorry someone made you feel bad.

Denae

I was simply saying that people were putting down Florida to raise children and saying how WHOLESOME vermont was....no where is a "perfect" place.


I wasn't putting you down personally....I was just saying how funny/ironic it is that just the other day someone posted that and now this!


ETA - whoops! Forgot the "e"!

 

[chobie]

Bingo!! Yep, I'm one of those people as well. Would I be happy about it? Of course not. But to compare a forcible rape with two teenagers whose hormones are out of control is ludicrous and insulting to real rape victims, IMO.

And I'm the mother of not only a son, but a daughter as well.

How about a 13 year old and a person in their 20's, 30's or older? As long as the teen "consents" to the sex you have no problem with it? Personally, I would. Adults should not have sex with children --end of story for me. Accoutability has to be places somewhere and IMO it does not get placed on the child.

Of course this is one of those things where individual circumstances of each case should be taken into consideration.

 

[CheshireVal]

Reading is one thing, comprehension another.

ford family

Is this supposed to be some kind of insult?

 

[CheshireVal]

Dragging this back to an "us vs. them" political argument completely ignores the real issue here and only pours more fuel on the partisan fires. IOW, it's unproductive and unnecessary.

I agree.

 

[Tigger_Magic]

Adults should not have sex with children --end of story for me. Accoutability has to be places somewhere and IMO it does not get placed on the child.

Of course this is one of those things where individual circumstances of each case should be taken into consideration.

Children cannot understand or appreciate the consequences of these actions, sometimes even as teens. That's why adults are held responsible and charged with a crime in these situations.