Posted on 03/11/2009 3:47:01 PM PDT by fight_truth_decay
Yes, one of the things that you thought she ought to do is give up her son to a “suitable married couple” which is an absolutely outlandish punishment.
That’s not primarily to punish the mother, but rather to protect the child and society’s commitment to the importance of committed, married parenthood.
Still looking for any answers to my questions.
I didn’t think they were particularly hard ones.
Reminds me of a scene from one of my favorite movies, "Baby Boom" when Diane Keaton is looking for a "suitable married couple" for the baby that was left to her by a cousin who died. Did you see it? She decides to brave the Vermont winters and start her own baby food business at home, to raise the little girl herself.
Awesome movie ~ hilarious, poignant and inspiring.
I think that her “restitution” is the shame that you so eagerly wish to bestow on her is restitution enough. Yes, her actions do have societal consequences but I don’t believe she deserves a life-sentence devoid of her child like you do.
Again, I will say that I believe that you need to seek spiritual counseling from your Priest for your obvious anger, etc. If Bristol were to go to confession and ask for forgiveness for “sin” she would be absolved - the church wouldn’t be seeking the kind of retribution you are seeking. You are the most intolerant Catholic that I have ever had the displeasure of meeting.
No, I’ll have to find it. It sounds wonderful. I’m sure something like that would be abhorrent to Philo-Junius though - can’t have single women raising children. I guess when my husband died I should have found a “suitable married couple” to take my son and raise him - over my dead body...LOL
So if my anger, etc., had not dragged the whole matter forward, no actual restitution would have been merited? That is, the restitution is having to listen to me?
In that case, why do you think you have the right to tell me to be quiet?
Oh, there’s plenty in the movie to tsk tsk about, but the transformation of Diane Keaton’s character is the beauty of it, and how the child, and her desire to raise her right, changes her forever, and leads her to the love of her life.
I love that movie, and the little one who plays the child is actually twins in real life.
I've never told you to be quiet! Don't put words into my posts.
Actually, in view of her public espousal of sin by denigrating chastity, some sort of public retraction is precisely what the Church would typically recommend as penance.
But, not being Catholic, I suppose you can imagine it says whatever you want it to say.
So, given that you do think her actions were socially damaging, what do you believe is appropriate restitution? I can respect a different prescription, just not the notion that the correct thing do is to pretend it didn’t matter and didn’t affect social discourse and thinking about things like abstinence, chastity and the importance of the married, two-parent family.
Fine. I’ll continue to speak.
But how can you then condemn my speech as intolerant if it is in fact part of the restitution you prescribe for Bristol’s antisocial behaviour?
Which is it—objectionable “judgmentalism” or whatever, or the chief component of your notion of just restitution?
It’s not my position to ask her for retribution. I’m not God nor am I trying to take his place like you are. I believe the girl has been humiliated enough by harsh/judgmental people like you.
And, by the way, how do you know that I’m not Catholic? Again, you assume far too much.
I believe I have stipulated that widows merit separate consideration from irresponsible unmarried teen-agers.
But hey it’s always more fun to sling ad-hominems than acknowledge the legitimacy of another point of view beside your own...
O.k. So now your belief is that she needs to accept an unspecified but limited amount of humiliation (to be arbitrated by you, I suppose) and that is all.
How exactly did that redress any of the damage she caused to society by her actions?
I’m asking about restitution, not punishment.
I’m done playing your stupid petty game. I’m firmly convinced that you’re nothing more than a nasty little troll that’s on FR only to perpetuate the stereotype of the intolerant conservative. I will no longer have any discussion with you.
The easiest way to tell you’re not Catholic is by considering your handle along with your “about” page, which indicates that the primary lens through which you relate to the conservative movement at large is through your concern about the right to keep and bear arms, not issues of life or family.
Coupled with your residence in South Carolina, ignorance of normal notions of restitution as part of penance the likelihood was clear.
The passive-aggressive way in which you challenged my assessment with proclaiming your Catholicism pretty much cinches it.
In parting, we note your capitulation on the question of restitution behind your parting insults.
Thanks for playing.
Thank heavens you have a dram of judgment left somewhere, even if it’s only for people who have the temerity not to agree with you and not capitulate in the face of mere childish insults like those above.
Do YOU care to answer the restitution questions above?
Or are bondage fantasies all you have to offer?
LOL!
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.