Doesn't one's parenting fall under the "life" category? Does in my mind. At the very least it is a freedom so it would fall under the "liberty" category for me. We need LESS government involvement in our daily lives not more. You seem to advocate a Democratic way of thinking and I can't ascribe to that mentality.
I don't think it's government involvement that's necessarily damaging to society. I think it's just certain individuals in it that people need to recognize and eliminate. Personally, I don't blame people in government who may make bad decisions, I blame the American people. Especially the ones who don't vote. I can't stand people who think they're helping by being apathetic.
WakeOfAshesPosts: 21,665destroyer of motherfuckers
Doesn't one's parenting fall under the "life" category? Does in my mind. At the very least it is a freedom so it would fall under the "liberty" category for me. We need LESS government involvement in our daily lives not more. You seem to advocate a Democratic way of thinking and I can't ascribe to that mentality.
No. parenting is not the same concept of life. Life is one's physical being and their very essence. Parenting is the job of helping another life grow until they are capable of supporting themselves. Our government was set up to protect peoples life and liberty. If a parent want's to jeopardize the life of her child by chloroforming her to sleep, then that person should be held accountable for taking the childs life. Why in your opinion does a 2 year old child have less right to LIFE then the childs mother?
I am actually a greater advocate for less government involvement then you are. I have a perfect voting record for supporting candidates that actually would reduce the government. Republicans never reduce government, only libertarians stay true to that belief.
But being in support of less government doesnt not equate to not supporting a persons right to life. Even if that life is only 2 years old. If someone is abusing their children and causing then physical harm, then I am a strong supporter of society stepping in and removing that child from that danger. I disagree with your opinion that a parents right to raise their children how they want to, is not a higher right then that childs LIFE. Life and Liberty and Property are three inalienable rights that no person (regardless of their relation to the person) has the right to take away from another.
WakeOfAshesPosts: 21,665destroyer of motherfuckers
or Wayne Williams, or Jeffrey Dahmer, or Al Capone, or any other case you want to site. They all had JURY VERDICTS. You only quote the ones that support your mindset and not the totality of it all. The simple fact is this was made a "high profile" case by Nancy Grace and HLN back in 2008 and EVERY single day since then Ms. Grace has been kind enough to tell us all how guilty Casey was. This young woman was called everything but her given name by Ms. Grace, who coined the phrase, "tot mom". I'm from Atlanta where Ms. Grace used to practice law. She was never that great. Her fiance' got murdered and she's has been on the sympathy train ever since. She's the classic "poor southern belle in distress" that I grew up around. If this case had not been made a rating cow for Ms. Grace and HLN then I would be willing to bet that the trial would have gone much differently. She enraged so many free thinking intelligent individuals with her assault on Casey Anthony that they were looking for a reason to let her go subconciously. I don't beleive that Ms. Grace has the right to do that but legally she does and I'm allowed to change the channel if I don't care to hear her venom.
My point in mentioning Scott Peterson is that you appear to have no ability to form your own opinion based on evidence presented. Scott was an example of someo ne convicted of first degree murder that had almost no supporting evidence. Your biggest claim in this thread is that she was judged NOT GUILTY so there is no way that she is guilty of anything and I shouldnt think poorly of her. She had nothing to do with the death of her child. I assume you have the exact same opinion as OJ, because in the exact same manor he was found NOT GUILTY by a jury of his peers. If you don't have that opinion, then you are being very hypocritical.
I maintain (and always have) that my opinion of guilt is based on the evidence that has been presented to me. I form my own opinion but recognize that I was not on the jury so the evidence I have seen may be tainted or may not be an accurate portrayal of what the people on the Jury received. I am not too pig headed to realize that I may not have all the facts and at some point in time if new information is made available then I have no qualms about changing my opinion on the matter based on new information. I'm not like you. Just because a jury says someone is guilty or not, that does not mean I can not review the evidence, the case, and form my own opinion.
I don't watch Nancy Grace. She is a piece of shit, and I think we would be better as a society without trash like her on the TV. Same goes for shit like the Jersey Shore or other shows that just makes society stupider. It's weird... In the last 3 weeks I dont think I have turned on the TV once other then for family movie night (which we do every saturday). TV is lame. except for football season \m/
Wake, you continue to miss my entire point. I'll go really slow.......OPINIONS do not mean shit. Mine, yours, the neighbors down the way, etc. The LAW is what matters in a courtroom. The law stated that if there was ANY reasonable doubt then you cannot convict on the charges presented. When the coroner stated that he could NOT determine cause of death enough reasonable doubt was there. How to we KNOW she was murdered or whether she was poisoned or drowned or died of lightning strike or anything. We only KNOW she is dead and that her mother is accused of causing her death.
I already surmised that you were a football fan. I'm not.
Oh jesus fucking christ. If the coroner couldn't determine cause of death then there's a huge problem imo. There was enough evidence for manslaughter, neglegence ect. But she didn't get those either. But who the fuck cares anymore? It's not the rest of America's fault that Florida put 12 retards on a jury nor how the media rode the cases ass, ect. She got away with accidently killing her child because she was in the way of her partying slutty life...just like how OJ got away with murder. We understand that we can't change the outcome of this trial, no one can. But can we voice opinions and state how retarded the jury was even when one of them spoke? Yes. Also, I don't remember who was involved with the case but someone just got an all expenses paid family vacation to Disney. Now I think that's a but bs but whatever. Move the fuck along, shit..
Oh jesus fucking christ. If the coroner couldn't determine cause of death then there's a huge problem imo. There was enough evidence for manslaughter, neglegence ect. But she didn't get those either. But who the fuck cares anymore? It's not the rest of America's fault that Florida put 12 retards on a jury nor how the media rode the cases ass, ect. She got away with accidently killing her child because she was in the way of her partying slutty life...just like how OJ got away with murder. We understand that we can't change the outcome of this trial, no one can. But can we voice opinions and state how retarded the jury was even when one of them spoke? Yes. Also, I don't remember who was involved with the case but someone just got an all expenses paid family vacation to Disney. Now I think that's a but bs but whatever. Move the fuck along, shit..
WakeOfAshesPosts: 21,665destroyer of motherfuckers
Wake, you continue to miss my entire point. I'll go really slow.......OPINIONS do not mean shit. Mine, yours, the neighbors down the way, etc. The LAW is what matters in a courtroom. The law stated that if there was ANY reasonable doubt then you cannot convict on the charges presented. When the coroner stated that he could NOT determine cause of death enough reasonable doubt was there. How to we KNOW she was murdered or whether she was poisoned or drowned or died of lightning strike or anything. We only KNOW she is dead and that her mother is accused of causing her death.
I'm not asking the court to lock her up based on my opinion. Believe it or not, I am actually not speaking to the court at all, nor do I think any court official is reading this forum. I am only expressing my opinions on a message board that talks about general shit like this. A message board that is about expressing your opinions, and in that setting, opinions are important. No one on here thinks their opinion has any importance to this case. We are only discussing our opinion on the outcome of this trial.
I don't have any first hand factual evidence of this case. I only know the evidence that was released which is 1. her two year old went missing for a month and she did nothing but party 2. when police found out a month later she said she gave her to a baby sitter. took them to the appartment and it was proved that no one had lived there for 6 months. 3. made up a dozen other stories that happened. 4. Her 2 year old child turned up dead. 4. chloroform making was found on her computer. 5. decomposition material from a 2 year old child similar to caylee was found in her trunk. 6. Duct tape and heart stickers (the very same that she owned) were found on the baby.
All of this circumstantial evidence is enough information for me to form the opinion that she was involved in the death of her child. I have the opinion that you dont need to know the exact cause of the death to convict someone in that death. Casey may of been guilty of 1st degree murder but their isnt enough evidence to support that "what if". It is my opinion that beyond any reasonable doubt that she was directly involved in her childs death due to the trunk, internet searches, and her actions 30 days after his childs disappearance. I am of the opinion that a manslaughter charge in this case should have been given to her.
I GET that you don't agree with my opinion. I am not trying to change your opinion, I am only stating mine.
WakeOfAshesPosts: 21,665destroyer of motherfuckers
Oh jesus fucking christ. If the coroner couldn't determine cause of death then there's a huge problem imo. There was enough evidence for manslaughter, neglegence ect. But she didn't get those either. But who the fuck cares anymore? It's not the rest of America's fault that Florida put 12 retards on a jury nor how the media rode the cases ass, ect. She got away with accidently killing her child because she was in the way of her partying slutty life...just like how OJ got away with murder. We understand that we can't change the outcome of this trial, no one can. But can we voice opinions and state how retarded the jury was even when one of them spoke? Yes. Also, I don't remember who was involved with the case but someone just got an all expenses paid family vacation to Disney. Now I think that's a but bs but whatever. Move the fuck along, shit..
I hope for her sake she gets some plastic surgery solely on the basis to hide her identity. She's gonna get no sleep at all in a week when she gets released.
WakeOfAshesPosts: 21,665destroyer of motherfuckers
I hope for her sake she gets some plastic surgery solely on the basis to hide her identity. She's gonna get no sleep at all in a week when she gets released.
If I was her, and would rather commit suicide then have to live with the knowledge that what I did killed my baby.
I hope for her sake she gets some plastic surgery solely on the basis to hide her identity. She's gonna get no sleep at all in a week when she gets released.
If I was her, and would rather commit suicide then have to live with the knowledge that what I did killed my baby.
she didn't report it for 30 days, you really think she gives a fuck? lolno. she just narrowly escaped life in prison, shes gonna do some interviews, write a book, and some other shit. cash in on the case and live the high life.
Comments
I am actually a greater advocate for less government involvement then you are. I have a perfect voting record for supporting candidates that actually would reduce the government. Republicans never reduce government, only libertarians stay true to that belief.
But being in support of less government doesnt not equate to not supporting a persons right to life. Even if that life is only 2 years old. If someone is abusing their children and causing then physical harm, then I am a strong supporter of society stepping in and removing that child from that danger. I disagree with your opinion that a parents right to raise their children how they want to, is not a higher right then that childs LIFE. Life and Liberty and Property are three inalienable rights that no person (regardless of their relation to the person) has the right to take away from another.
I maintain (and always have) that my opinion of guilt is based on the evidence that has been presented to me. I form my own opinion but recognize that I was not on the jury so the evidence I have seen may be tainted or may not be an accurate portrayal of what the people on the Jury received. I am not too pig headed to realize that I may not have all the facts and at some point in time if new information is made available then I have no qualms about changing my opinion on the matter based on new information. I'm not like you. Just because a jury says someone is guilty or not, that does not mean I can not review the evidence, the case, and form my own opinion.
I don't watch Nancy Grace. She is a piece of shit, and I think we would be better as a society without trash like her on the TV. Same goes for shit like the Jersey Shore or other shows that just makes society stupider. It's weird... In the last 3 weeks I dont think I have turned on the TV once other then for family movie night (which we do every saturday). TV is lame. except for football season \m/
I already surmised that you were a football fan. I'm not.
[-(
blue turbins
From Those Fishes - I Fingered An Old Bitch (i got Aids on my finger)
I don't have any first hand factual evidence of this case. I only know the evidence that was released which is
1. her two year old went missing for a month and she did nothing but party
2. when police found out a month later she said she gave her to a baby sitter. took them to the appartment and it was proved that no one had lived there for 6 months.
3. made up a dozen other stories that happened.
4. Her 2 year old child turned up dead.
4. chloroform making was found on her computer.
5. decomposition material from a 2 year old child similar to caylee was found in her trunk.
6. Duct tape and heart stickers (the very same that she owned) were found on the baby.
All of this circumstantial evidence is enough information for me to form the opinion that she was involved in the death of her child. I have the opinion that you dont need to know the exact cause of the death to convict someone in that death. Casey may of been guilty of 1st degree murder but their isnt enough evidence to support that "what if". It is my opinion that beyond any reasonable doubt that she was directly involved in her childs death due to the trunk, internet searches, and her actions 30 days after his childs disappearance. I am of the opinion that a manslaughter charge in this case should have been given to her.
I GET that you don't agree with my opinion. I am not trying to change your opinion, I am only stating mine.