And what do you think the point of satire about someone being starved and dehydrated to death was?
Don’t you think there wasn’t enough conversation about it?
Or that it was ignored?
Whose principles is he trying to get to question?
Those who believe in the sanctity of life and consider her murder a torturous and barbaric way to kill someone?
Or those who agreed with the killing? And how would his satire get them to rethink their position on it?
If you were tied down and starved and dehydrated to death, I presume then that you wouldn’t object if someone made fun of you and what you went through. Right? I mean, it would be just too funny to watch it, wouldn’t it? And you’d just be having a laugh a minute the whole time you were dying. Right?
And if you didn’t, we could tell you just to *get over it*. I mean it would be no big deal after all, right?
If you don’t get the point of the joke, chances are you are the joke. Or, those with your apparent approach are the joke.
I suppose it was harsh, but those who roundly and mercilessly condemn others who feel the the court ruled correctly in this tragedy or may have made similar choices in their families have less respect for life than you do are guilty of as much tactless judgmental self righteousness as anyone-— which makes you a ripe target for satire. You stick your chin out so far for so long and someone will take a swing and the majority will never take you seriously.
For nasty death lovers, it’s only funny when other people suffer and die.