Posted on 09/03/2016 7:23:25 AM PDT by maggief
The 'beastly acts' are a result of the evil. You can't get rid of the evil just by punishing the acts. You have to attack the evil at it's source.
“”You can’t get rid of the evil just by punishing the acts. You have to attack the evil at it’s source.””
And that is done HOW and does WHAT for the victims? Flowery slogans are neat but do nothing to get the job done for the ones hurt and hurting...
No more of this cushy life in prison after you took someone else life.
Thats right I said killing them. executing them, hanging them in the public square at high noon.
Will it help the victims ? It will sure as hell prevent some future victims.
There’s only one sure cure for a pedophile and it comes in various calibers.
The fundamental wickedness in the human heart, where all of this begins, and the ultimate comfort and healing for the victims is covered by what Jesus did on the cross. If that sounds like just a flowery slogan then I would suggest that you make the effort to find out who Jesus really is and exactly what good news of the gospel really means.
“”If that sounds like just a flowery slogan then I would suggest that you make the effort to find out who Jesus really is and exactly what good news of the gospel really means.””
And I would suggest that you develop some humility and stop spouting cliches’ exhibiting such ignorance about another person’s faith. If you don’t have a valid response to back up your comments about combatting evil, I would suggest you save your breath. Having become a Christian probably long before you were born, I know where I stand in my faith and don’t need platitudes. You were asked a simple question and you chose to go on the defensive as opposed to answering the question.
Dear Mr. Pot
Thank you for your response
Sincerely
Mr. Kettle
Another homosexual sadist. It’s the worst sort of truth-hatred that our culture now calls what they do to each other “love,” when it’s actually the worst kind of abuse.
I read the article earlier in the day and agree that it's confusing. But here's my take:
There were two incidents of criminal activity. A young boy from Cold Spring was abducted, sexually abused, but set free. By the time that crime(s) was figured out the statute of limitations expired on that case.
Jacobs case was abduction, sexual assault, and murder. That murder charge will still be open.
The irony here, as another poster pointed out, is that after the 2012 election, Minnesota had Democratic executive branch and both chambers. They immediately passed legislation championed by Jeffrey Anderson, attorney for multiple clergy abuse victims, to be able to "look back" beyond the statute of limitations to bring civil actions against clergy.
So, although this perp committed an abduction and sexual assault of the Cold Spring boy, he can't be charged. However, if a member of the clergy did something like this he could be brought into civil court.
I get that they're not the same, civil and criminal, and that we're comparing apples and oranges here but still there's something that doesn't quite feel right about it.
Reminds me of Adam Walsh’s killing
http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=6471791
Child Abduction Facts
http://www.parents.com/kids/safety/stranger-safety/child-abduction-facts/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.