"wd" <server57.5 at hatmail.com> wrote in message
news:uuqgprdr52dabd at corp.supernews.com...
> > Now answer THIS question:
> > What do you think the odds were that the men who volunteered to be
> > were INNOCENT?
>> what men volunteered to be casterated?
>>> > http://christianparty.net/dna.htm> >
> > When more than HALF of the men IN PRISON whose DNA was tested after
> > conviction DID NOT MATCH THE DNA from the crime scene, how many INNOCENT
> > American men do you believe are in prison? Or what percentage do you
> > believe is INNOCENT?
> > What should be done to the women who LIED and got innocent men falsely
> > convicted?
> > Consider the magnitude of this problem, and you'll see that your
> > even if you didn't like the answer, is utterly trivial.
>>> I am on record many times as an advocate of DNA testing. AND i have spoken
> out many times about women who falsely accuse men that were latter found
> innocent bu DNA testing.
> None of your claims i dispute (Except ONE)
>> I have read many decisions by the SC.
> And most of the outrageous decisions have come from the MEN, not the WOMEN
> EXAMPLE: The MEN voted to castrate another MAN. The women DID NOT.
>> Now, i asked you WHY you feel the men are MORE reasonable then the women
> and you failed to give me an answer twice now
>> WHY are the MEN MORE reasonable in judgements THEN the WOMEN ARE.
>> Fail to answer, and strike 3 you are out.
You already got an answer, it's just that you didn't like it.
This was a STUPID position for these women "justices" to take. Most
Americans DISAGREE with that STUPID position and agree to this day with the
men justices. Even the men involved disagreed with that decision. Even
Thomas Jefferson proposed that rapists be castrated
http://christianparty.net/jefferson.htm and most Americans agree with him,
to this day as much as they DISAGREE with the current crop of "justices",
BOTH men and women.
Of course STUPID feminazis and "liberals" and other muds "think" that you're
right, but most Americans DISAGREE with you. That should tell you
something, at least.
You take a case where women "justices" were on the wrong side of morality,
the wrong side of public opinion, the wrong side of Christianity, the wrong
side of economics and the taxpayer, and the wrong side of the "victims"
themselves, and expect us to praise the STUPID women who wrote it? No.
Trusting your phony feminazi "compassion" is what got this putative
Christian nation into the huge moral abyss that we're in now, and now you
want to be praised for it? No. What feminazis have done to this putative
Christian nation ought to be a capital crime, not a source for praise.
We know why you "think" that "women's intuition" is a superior form of
"reasoning", but we also know that if there were a single thing about it
that was workable, that American 12th grade girls wouldn't have scored dead
last in TIMSS. But 32% of their responses were not statistically
significant, 23% were statistically significant because they scored lower
than if they'd just guessed, and of the 45% that was statistically
significant, the amount by which they scored lower than boys was
statistically significant on 24.4%, by which they scored higher than boys
was statistically significant on 2.6%, and the difference between boys and
girls was not stastically significant on 18%.
"Intuition" my butt. And what these "justices" did is just as bad if not
worse than what Sandra Day O'Connor wrote:
In keeping with our rejection of the common law understanding of a woman's
role within the family, the Court held in Danforth that the Constitution
does not permit a State to require a married woman to obtain her husband's
consent before undergoing an abortion. 428 U. S., at 69
BUT--such a law could only work of women were NEVER allowed to be jurors,
judges, justices, or lawyers. There have been far, far too many justice
system errors since they were permitted into the field. It was because of
them that our incarceration RATE increased ten fold at the VERY SAME time
that the murder rate almost tripled--which took a real heavy dose of
"women's intuition" to achieve.
ps--if you want to know what the inmates themselves think of the two
options--incarceration or castration--read the rest of this article
He says "We horrible monster men really do exist prowling the dark avenues
of peaceful family communities, stalking and then pouncing on our vulnerable
prey forcing thousands of innocent children to endure these disgusting and
horrible nightmarish acts of sexual violence every day. What murderous
monsters, demons and bogeymen terrorize your children and give them
nightmares. Are they haunted by child molesters such as I? . The child
molester monster could be wearing the image of my face as I have been masked
as a brother, a cousin, a step-father, a school bus driver, a neighbor, a
family friend and a total stranger that has molested hundreds of
unsuspecting boys and girls of all ages, most of them under the age of 10."
Those statistics I read you earlier about 260,300 sexual offenses against
children in 1995 show that this individual is not the only one out there who
could make these statements. The letter continues and states that the
governors of Texas and California should support passage of bills to make
this treatment possible for people who can no longer control their own
conduct. There are individuals who are released from prison many times who
tell the prison officials and the releasing authorities "don't let me out
because I am going to do it again." They are let out anyway. We have heard
these stories from surrounding states told over and over again. Hopefully,
with passage of this piece of legislation it will prevent them from being
told in Nevada.