“in almost every state in this country, rape requires proof of not only of nonconsent but also “force.” If you take my stuff without my consent, it’s called larceny. If you also use force, it’s called robbery. But if you take my bodily integrity without my consent, it’s not a crime at all, unless you also use force. Non-consent should be enough.” – Wendy Murphy on the inadequate protection of female sexual integrity under American law.
According to The Economist/YouGov poll, apparently 16.56% of the people surveyed believe that at least an innocent has been executed in the last 5 year, and still supports death penalty.
From the same survey, 62% of respondents answered in favor to the question “28. Do you favor the death penalty for serious crimes such as murder and rape?” It is possible that some of the respondents may only favor death penalty who is proven in a infallible criminal justice system. So theoretically they are not favoring the chance of killing innocents. but still… people have to understand that an infallible system is near impossible in reality. Incidentally 76% of these proponents of death penalty think death penalty is not imposed enough. Wow talk about blood thirsty.
People at the Innocence Project, are you reading this?
All of the data can be found here.
Let’s go back to the Golden Rule. As I grew older, I saw—with a shock from which I don’t think I ever recovered—that this Rule, while excellent in theory, was not workable in practice. Transgression was alarmingly ever-present. People simply could not accord each other the “justice” of treating one another as they themselves wished to be treated. Let me revise that. Forget people. It was I who couldn’t help transgressing. With all the good will in the world, I soon came to see that I myself was a swamp of fears, fantasies, and defenses that caused me to forfeit the integrity needed to act with Golden Rule fairness toward those around me.
My temper was ungovernable; an aggravated sense of insecurity caused me, in exchange after exchange, relationship after relationship, year after year, to do exactly what the Rule said it was impermissible to do: I scorned and humiliated, I challenged and confronted, dismissed and discounted; suffered when I acted badly, but could not bring myself under control. The source of the transgression lay deep in the wounded unconscious: it commanded me. I loved many people in the abstract—felt for them, sympathized with them, romanticized them—but I could not give them the only thing that mattered: what Kant called “respect,” the one basic recognition required to bypass that fatal sense of degradation. In short, the chaos within prevented me from acting as though others were as real to me as I was to myself, although in theory they were. And here we come to a crux of the matter.
It is this—the chaos within—that is hardly ever addressed in Justice; although it is this, precisely, that is responsible for the all-important gap between practice and theory.
This is part of the reason why human by nature cannot individually govern themselves, why power corrupts and why we need transparency, checks and accountability.
Glenn Greenwald debates Chuck Todd on whether Bush torture policy should be investigated and the role of the Press. Great debate a must hear.
My thoughts on this is that Bush torture policy should be investigated, but only prosecuted if it can be won. cause if Obama’s justice demand losses Bush torture policy will be in effect legal. and we dont want that to happen.
or some legal mind please tell me that i am wrong.