Sunday, February 26, 2006

Judge Says, "Let her die".

Why is our oligarchy so interested in seeing the innocent die and the guilty live? On the one hand we have Michael Morales, who (not having ensured that his victim was properly sedated first) strangled Terri Lynn Winchell with his leather belt so hard that the belt broke, then smashed her head in with 23 blows of a hammer, then dragged her body out of the car they were in and raped her, returning to the scene later to see if she was safely dead. In the view of our black-robed oligarchy this is not deserving of death. His just penalty has been suspended indefinitely because no one can be sure that he will feel no pain during his execution (like 23 hammer blows, for instance). This is an end-around to the death penalty. Oligarch Fogel wishes to see it ended, and since the law does not support him in this, he applies ever more difficult conditions in its execution with an eye to preventing it entirely. Apparently Michael Morales is worthy of life, in his view.

On the other hand we have Charlotte Wyatt, who is sick. She is 2 and 1/2 years old and has been struggling terribly for her entire life. Oligarch Hedley [Update: Hedley is a British Oligarch, not one of ours. - ed.] had, upon Charlotte's improvement (sufficient even to go home), ruled that she was worthy of life and that efforts to save her should continue. Shortly after, Charlotte suffered a dangerous infection, whereupon the Oligarch, in an emergency injunction, reversed his ruling and now says that she should die. She responds to treatment, yet that treatment is to be withheld. Apparently, in the view of the Oligarch, she is not worthy of life.

What is the matter with our judges? Why do they value the murderer and wish to see the innocent die? My contempt for the Bench at all levels grows daily. So to my contempt for "lawmakers" who fail to draft laws that prevent this kind of horror.

This is a British case, I wrongly assumed it to be an American one. Still, liberal judges in the U.S. make these same kind of decisions. I will find them for you as they come up.

The reason I leave this post up is because of the shared values of western liberalism in whatever countries it manifests itself. Our legal system in the United States is different that the one in the U.K. and an American Judge would have a bit more difficulty in achieving the result that Hedley did, but would still seek to do so.

Liberalism™ in Europe and in the U.S. values abortion on demand, euthanasia, assisted suicide, and the gradual expansion of all of those. Liberalism™ in both Europe and the U.S. seek to abolish the death penalty wherever it exists (in the West, they had no problem with Saddam) and preserve the lives of murderers while condemning the infirm to death. Liberal judges in the U.K. and the U.S. are of one mind in this.

No comments: