No, no, you have this all wrong. The poor crook must have been a victim of some kind of societal oppression that forced him to the act (note I did not say crime) that got him into court in the first place. Then, I am sure that the lawyer did not serve the client well. The whole thing is the fault of everyone except the Latrell Spreewell wanna-be choker, and I am sure there is a strong ineffective assistance of counsel claim somewhere.
Indeed, Bard. Forgive me: I had once again slipped into my white middle-class privileged paradigm. Where is my compassion? But then, who can blame me--after all, it's not my fault I'm white, middle class, and privileged... Where's my victim card?
Well aware that this conversation is already dead and I should have been reading Monica's blog more often, still gotta say....
No, no, you see it was the straw man who made him do it...the same straw man who constructed your satirical argument. There's a huge difference between saying mental illness or a lifetime of abuse mitigates responsibility enough so that a defendant should not be executed for murder.....and saying that a person is entirely not responsible for his actions because of his race, childhood, etc.
The former is a valid argument in deciding whether the ultimate measure of execution should be taken. The latter is a fantasy, a construct in the minds of some conservatives to demonize the idea that there is such a thing as collective responsibility (as well as individual responsibility).
The essence of this spirit was captured in a moving speech about tolerance given last year by the student body president of one of your sister colleges. She related the story by Robert Fulghum about a young pastor who, finding himself in charge of some very energetic children, hits upon a game called "Giants, Wizards and Dwarfs." "You have to decide now," the pastor instructed the children, "which you are ... a giant, a wizard or a dwarf?"
At that, a small girl tugging at his pants leg, asked, "But where do the mermaids stand?"
The pastor told her there are no mermaids, and she says, "Oh yes there are," she said. "I am a mermaid."
Now this little girl knew what she was and she was not about to give up on either her identity or the game. She intended to take her place wherever mermaids fit into the scheme of things. Where do the mermaids stand ... All those who are different, those who do not fit the boxes and pigeonholes? "Answer that question," wrote Fulghum, "and you can build a school, a nation, or a whole world."
~~Barbara Bush
Wellesley College Commencement Address, 1990
One year of marriage under my belt, and it's only getting better! We've added another member to the family, a sweet and spicy lady parakeet to help keep DeWitt in line.
5 comments:
Heh. Wow. And after the attorney did all that work, probably at no expense to the defendant. Ungrateful. I'd ask to withdraw, too.
No, no, you have this all wrong. The poor crook must have been a victim of some kind of societal oppression that forced him to the act (note I did not say crime) that got him into court in the first place. Then, I am sure that the lawyer did not serve the client well. The whole thing is the fault of everyone except the Latrell Spreewell wanna-be choker, and I am sure there is a strong ineffective assistance of counsel claim somewhere.
Indeed, Bard. Forgive me: I had once again slipped into my white middle-class privileged paradigm. Where is my compassion? But then, who can blame me--after all, it's not my fault I'm white, middle class, and privileged... Where's my victim card?
Well aware that this conversation is already dead and I should have been reading Monica's blog more often, still gotta say....
No, no, you see it was the straw man who made him do it...the same straw man who constructed your satirical argument. There's a huge difference between saying mental illness or a lifetime of abuse mitigates responsibility enough so that a defendant should not be executed for murder.....and saying that a person is entirely not responsible for his actions because of his race, childhood, etc.
The former is a valid argument in deciding whether the ultimate measure of execution should be taken. The latter is a fantasy, a construct in the minds of some conservatives to demonize the idea that there is such a thing as collective responsibility (as well as individual responsibility).
I'll buy it, Ben. Thanks for posting that up. :-)
Post a Comment