MAN SENTENCED FOR POSSESSING INDECENT PICTURES OF CHILDREN - DEPRAVED YES - BUT IS THIS THE THOUGHT POLICE?
Yes it's sick. Yes, it's depraved. The man deserves to be utterly shunned and left in no doubt about his depravity. But punished by the the law? I'm not so sure.
I mean where is all of this thought-police stuff going? All very Orwellian isn't it?
Where do we draw the line? Who says what should be prosecuted under law and what should not? What do this man's actions prove?
I'll tell you what they prove - they prove he's a sicko - that's what they prove - a poor, sad sicko.
I'll tell you what they prove - they prove he's a sicko - that's what they prove - a poor, sad sicko.
It's obvious that he's a risk to kids - but has he actually done anything to any? Is dreaming about committing a crime a crime? By having sick images of kids in his possession has he actually harmed anyone bar himself?
The things that are beyond man's ken God will judge. Let's not play God - there are things we should leave to him.
Do you know what the cause of this confusion is? I'll tell you the cause. It's Atheism. If society wasn't so stubbornly and stupidly God-hating things would be a lot better.
Because of this state of affairs the approach is always to think that we must pull out all the stops to create a perfect society - a Utopia - a heaven on earth. If people weren't so stupid they would look at the Bible where they would find that God informs us that because of the depravity of man's heart perfection is impossible in this world. Understanding this basic fact would help us get things into perspective to say the least.
The purpose of the law is not to create a perfect world. The purpose of the law is to educate. To teach the difference between right and wrong. Punishment is the deterrent. But man's law must have a point at which it stops. That point must be where reason and logic dictate (if we're wise these will be guided by God's word).
The purpose of the law is not to create a perfect world. The purpose of the law is to educate. To teach the difference between right and wrong. Punishment is the deterrent. But man's law must have a point at which it stops. That point must be where reason and logic dictate (if we're wise these will be guided by God's word).
To make it a crime in law to privately possess sick pictures is ludicrous. This effectively means that we have crossed the line from actually having to physically commit a crime before we are guilty under law to now being guilty for just thinking about it.
Because, after all, in reality, regardless of how distasteful it might be - that is all that he is guilty of - thinking about it. There is a world of difference between thinking about a crime and actually committing it. As soon as we start down the road of making thinking something a crime under law immediately we have become dangerous bigots.
Remember the Nazis? They did that.
Remember the Nazis? They did that.
It's the same as the hate-crime thing. To beat someone up is a crime. But to beat someone up because you don't like his race or beliefs is a worse crime. Who says? Where did this logic come from? I thought a crime was a crime irrespective of what was going on in the chump's head at the time. So a broken head is worse if it's broken by a racist than by someone who just wants to steal your phone is it? Who says we're to analyse the nuances of the depraved thoughts of every screwball we catch.
Are we also going to send out undercover officers to listen in to conversations in pubs, streets and smoke-filled rooms and arrest anyone heard talking about anything anti-social? If we're going to go down that road - maybe we could start with the Muslims raging about cutting people's heads off over cartoons.
It reminds me of the Woody Allen film Bananas: after the revolution the rebel leader becomes president and in his maiden speech he orders everyone to speak Swedish and change their underwear every half hour ordering them to wear them over their clothes so that the police could check that they were clean.
Only they can't make people wear their thoughts on the outside - but wouldn't they just love it if they could?
Imagine how overcrowded the prisons would be then.
Only they can't make people wear their thoughts on the outside - but wouldn't they just love it if they could?
Imagine how overcrowded the prisons would be then.
No comments:
Post a Comment