• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Eighteen involved in gang rape of 11 year old girl in Texas

i would never kill someone unless i knew for certain they committed an awful crime against my children. in fact, i doubt i could retaliate UNLESS the crime was against my children. in this case, seems a video is making the rounds.

now, justice is not really a primitive thought process. it's a necessary tool for society to punish those who commit crimes. otherwise, anarchy.

And I would support the death penalty for you, lib. You kill someone in cold blood and DNA can prove it, absolutely, I would be happy to put the needle in your arm. You are no more "worthy" of living than anyone else who commits murder, sorry to tell you. Where DNA can prove guilt, I am supportive of the DP, all other cases, I am not. What jury would convict you? One that followed the laws of the land, that's what.
 
Last edited:
And I would support the death penalty for you, lib. You kill someone in cold blood and DNA can prove it, absolutely, I would be happy to put the needle in your arm. You are no more "worthy" of living than anyone else who commits murder, sorry to tell you. Where DNA can prove guilt, I am supportive of the DP, all other cases, I am not. What jury would convict you? One that followed the laws of the land, that's what.

if that's what a jury decides, so be it. i would still, more than likely, go after someone who did something like that to my child.
 
And I would support the death penalty for you, lib. You kill someone in cold blood and DNA can prove it, absolutely, I would be happy to put the needle in your arm. You are no more "worthy" of living than anyone else who commits murder, sorry to tell you. Where DNA can prove guilt, I am supportive of the DP, all other cases, I am not. What jury would convict you? One that followed the laws of the land, that's what.

That's a little extreme. I can see her need for revenge on her daughter's behalf. But to keep order she would still have to be tried as any other murderer. I don't support the death penalty in any way. I don't think we have the right to say what life has value and what life does not.
 
That's a little extreme. I can see her need for revenge on her daughter's behalf. But to keep order she would still have to be tried as any other murderer. I don't support the death penalty in any way. I don't think we have the right to say what life has value and what life does not.

i fully admit i would probably commit a crime, punishment or not.
 
if that's what a jury decides, so be it. i would still, more than likely, go after someone who did something like that to my child.

But I think you're daughter would want her mother with her more than her rapist dead. You're refusing to see the big picture. You need to see how your actions effect everyone, instead of just mindlessly satiated your emotional need for retribution
 
But I think you're daughter would want her mother with her more than her rapist dead. You're refusing to see the big picture. You need to see how your actions effect everyone, instead of just mindlessly satiated your emotional need for retribution

i agree with you......but my need for retribution wouldn't be mindless. do you have children?
 
When compared with other things, yes it is. You can call me heartless, Carlin knows it wouldn't be the first time, but rape to this degree on all ages is a fairly common occurrence, and compared to other acts it's detrimental effects (which is I assume why we classify it as evil) are minuscule at best, in light of this, acts like this one seem somewhat minor. Don't think I don't have sympathy for this girl. But to me it just seems like paying attention to a gunfight while a nuclear explosion is going off behind me. There's just too much evil in the world for me to get worked up over something as minor as this. I know I seem really heartless, but try dropping your emotions for a second and view things from a purely objective, more logical standpoint.

i just had an opportunity to read this little gem, and i'm wishing i hadn't. why don't you tell the little girl just how miniscule the effects of being violted 20 times are? if we don't pay atention to the gunfight, we deserve the nuclear explosion.
 
i just had an opportunity to read this little gem, and i'm wishing i hadn't. why don't you tell the little girl just how miniscule the effects of being violted 20 times are? if we don't pay atention to the gunfight, we deserve the nuclear explosion.

I'm not going through the vain action of trying to properly explain my views again. I admit that post was worded very badly, but I feel like no matter what I say it'll still be misinterpreted.
 
In certain parts of Africa it's pretty much expected that most women will be raped at some point in their lives. I don't really care about proving my point enough to find proof.



I accept your concession you made it up.
 
I'm not going through the vain action of trying to properly explain my views again. I admit that post was worded very badly, but I feel like no matter what I say it'll still be misinterpreted.

maybe. but i would still give it a shot.
 
I'm not going through the vain action of trying to properly explain my views again. I admit that post was worded very badly, but I feel like no matter what I say it'll still be misinterpreted.



this seems to be a pattern for you.
 
I accept your concession you made it up.

Of course I did. I'm just a heartless monster who hates little girls, and everything I say is a lie.

Do a little research and you'll find out how ****ed up it is to be female in some third world countries.
 
we are not in africa, although texas could be described as backward.
 
I don't separate humanity by geographical region.

neither do i. however, just because atrocities like this happen in africa makes them no less horrific. we can do something about them here, though.
 
neither do i. however, just because atrocities like this happen in africa makes them no less horrific. we can do something about them here, though.

I'd say the law is doing pretty much all it can about, without violating too much personal privacy and freedom. You are of course misinterpreting what I'm trying to say just like everyone else.
 
I'd say the law is doing pretty much all it can about, without violating too much personal privacy and freedom. You are of course misinterpreting what I'm trying to say just like everyone else.

I think we all understand what you said and find it more than a little strange. The flaw is not with those who read your posts.
 
This is one of the reasons I value logic over emotion.

You realize that removing all emotion is in and of itself inhuman as well.

Human beings have emotions. To seperate them out and attempt to remove them is in and of itself attempting to be something other than human. We are not computers, we are not robots, emotions do factor in.

One can definitely take a step back, view a situation logically, and still express emotion. Wake pointed out how his class tried to look at 9/11 sans emotion...he also pointed out utter disgust and rage was still had after that for the perpetrators.

That's NOT what you're doing. You're not attempting to remove emotion from your view of what should be done, you're trying to remove emotion completely. The most you give is a cold, heartless, hollow "sympathy" for the victim. While you refuse to allow emotion to enter in, you also act illogical by ignoring that humans by their very nature have a certain amount of emapthy in them and view situations based on that.

Logically, yes. A girl that's 11 getting raped by 18 men is not as bad as say....an entire race of people being exterminated, or an entire country living in abject poverty, or a village where the women are raped daily. However, also, when you logically look at the context in which people are talking you realize they're speaking in a relatively micro level of crimes against individuals within a developed country rather than a macro version of the world at large. When viewing it that way, a gang rape at that age could be even worse than a grisley murder due to the emotional problems it could subject the woman to for the rest of her life. Its arguably worse than the majority of rape cases that happen to older individuals because the affects of it would be potentially longer lasting and the mind is less developed and more susceptiable to issues.

If someone in America got fired, had their house burned down, then called and told their daughter was just raped brutally for 2 weeks straight and then killed, their son committed suicide, their wife was divorsing him, and he has aids....you could still, using your twisted version of logic, go "eh, my sympathizes for him...but that's not THAT big of a deal" because hey, there's worse stuf theoritically going on somewhere in the world.

There's a difference between looking at a situation logically, and looking at it heartlessly. You sit here going on about how logical you THINK you are, while you then take peoples emotional reactions as if they are honest suggestions and not emotional responses to a horrible act in relation to the norm for their existance.

You say you strive to be logical, I say you're striving to be something other than a human.
 
I think we all understand what you said and find it more than a little strange. The flaw is not with those who read your posts.

No I'd say I worded it incorrectly. Which gave a much different impression than the one I was going for.
 
I don't separate humanity by geographical region.

That's ridiculously illogical...but then again, you're not actually about logic and just further proving peoples points.

Its illogical to suggest that different locations with significantly different circumstances and variables should be judged and viewed as identical and similar in all fashions.
 
You realize that removing all emotion is in and of itself inhuman as well.

Human beings have emotions. To seperate them out and attempt to remove them is in and of itself attempting to be something other than human. We are not computers, we are not robots, emotions do factor in.

One can definitely take a step back, view a situation logically, and still express emotion. Wake pointed out how his class tried to look at 9/11 sans emotion...he also pointed out utter disgust and rage was still had after that for the perpetrators.

That's NOT what you're doing. You're not attempting to remove emotion from your view of what should be done, you're trying to remove emotion completely. The most you give is a cold, heartless, hollow "sympathy" for the victim. While you refuse to allow emotion to enter in, you also act illogical by ignoring that humans by their very nature have a certain amount of emapthy in them and view situations based on that.

Logically, yes. A girl that's 11 getting raped by 18 men is not as bad as say....an entire race of people being exterminated, or an entire country living in abject poverty, or a village where the women are raped daily. However, also, when you logically look at the context in which people are talking you realize they're speaking in a relatively micro level of crimes against individuals within a developed country rather than a macro version of the world at large. When viewing it that way, a gang rape at that age could be even worse than a grisley murder due to the emotional problems it could subject the woman to for the rest of her life. Its arguably worse than the majority of rape cases that happen to older individuals because the affects of it would be potentially longer lasting and the mind is less developed and more susceptiable to issues.

If someone in America got fired, had their house burned down, then called and told their daughter was just raped brutally for 2 weeks straight and then killed, their son committed suicide, their wife was divorsing him, and he has aids....you could still, using your twisted version of logic, go "eh, my sympathizes for him...but that's not THAT big of a deal" because hey, there's worse stuf theoritically going on somewhere in the world.

There's a difference between looking at a situation logically, and looking at it heartlessly. You sit here going on about how logical you THINK you are, while you then take peoples emotional reactions as if they are honest suggestions and not emotional responses to a horrible act in relation to the norm for their existance.

You say you strive to be logical, I say you're striving to be something other than a human.

1. Human beings also have reason. For example, when you're in an argument with a loved one, you will likely try to dissociate from the emotion for a limited amount of time in order to understand their point of view without letting your anger cloud your judgment.

2. Human beings can't do anything inhuman. It's a common logical fallacy. If a human being is doing it, it is by definition, human.

3. I pointed out how my class looked at 9/11 sans emotion and I completely understand where Arcadius is coming from. He might not feel the same intensity of disgust I feel when I hear the story, but like him I don't see the point in getting violently worked up every time a story like this comes up. I would never be able to function otherwise.
 
Back
Top Bottom