RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

tazzygirl -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/21/2011 10:30:12 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather

quote:

Thou shall not kill. 
the authors didn't kill anybody.
and the parents did so unintentionally, thus they cannot be held accountable under the 10 commandments, as it has been established that the actual hebrew wording of the commandment reads "thou shalt not murder", and murder requires intent. try again.


reality: 2, tazzy: 0


you are having reading comprehension problems again, Hannah.  No one said the authors killed anyone.  The parents did.  You know, the ones proclaiming to live such a religious life.

intent can be seen in taking a pvc pipe to beat a child.  Its not like its a new device.  Garden hoses have been used as torture devices for years.  Doesnt take a science degree to know that you dont hit a child with such a tool.  They (meaning the parents since you are having trouble figuring out pronouns) are able to read. 

your count is a tad bit off.



HannahLynHeather -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/21/2011 10:53:10 PM)

actually timbit, it has fuck all to do with reading comprehension, it is a matter of being comprehensive <i know the words look similar but they are different>. i mentioned them to cover that base.

now onto the meat of your post, though it's more spam than real meat. it doesn't matter how stupid their actions were, they did not set out to beat the child to death. that wasn't their intent. unless you can present some sort of proof to the contrary, you're assuming facts not in evidence.

as to them being able to read, that is the whole fucking problem now, isn't it. they read in the book how they should beat their kid with the 1/4" tubing, and that it was not only safe to do so, but both right and godly to do it. so i really don't fucking see how their degree literacy in any way supports your contention.

you are really grasping here, tazzy, and are, as usual, making less and less sense with every post. ah well [sm=dunno.gif] such is life in tazzyland.

reality: 3, tazzy: 0



angelikaJ -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/21/2011 11:06:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather

quote:

Thou shall not kill. 
the authors didn't kill anybody.
and the parents did so unintentionally, thus they cannot be held accountable under the 10 commandments, as it has been established that the actual hebrew wording of the commandment reads "thou shalt not murder", and murder requires intent. try again.


reality: 2, tazzy: 0


They beat her for 70 hours.
They beat her after she vomited.
They beat her after she became unconscious.
They beat her so badly her trauma injuries were like those of earthquake victims.
At some point, intent becomes a moot point, despite the fact that they believed God wanted them to do this.

Do I believe the philosophy described in the book has some bearing on this horrible, tragic death?
You bet.

When I read things such as a description by one of the author's children in which she punishes her daughter for not being happy.
They advocate the use of the pvc pipe.
And when the basic premise is to begin using pain to teach babies how you want them to behave, because the Amish whip their mules...?




LadyPact -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/21/2011 11:10:20 PM)

To answer the original question, in My opinion, the authors of the book do not hold a legal liability here.  I could write up any ridiculous tripe that I wanted to tomorrow.  It wouldn't be My fault if people were dumb enough to believe it and act on it to the extreme.  There are actually a number of books out there on the concerning the theory of raising children that a number of parents will tell you have some bad advice.

So, the parents did it in the name of God, huh?  Well, in their minds, they probably did.  That didn't make them right.  There is no segment of society that has perfection among it's ranks.  Not Christians, not BDSM folks, not people who have Master's degrees, or any other dang thing. 

I happen to be a person of faith.  I also happen to know that there are other "people of faith" out there who are darn right imbalanced.  No matter how you classify yourself, you've got some twisted folks who identify in the same way that you do.

For the record, I absolutely have popped My kids for incidents that were going to cost them far more than Me slapping them on the hand was a better lesson than them reaching up to find out what the word "hot" really meant or they were just plain fascinated with that electrical outlet.  You're not going to reason with a small child who's brain hasn't developed an attention span of longer than fifteen minutes.  They don't understand cause and effect and that stage.



tazzygirl -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/21/2011 11:17:11 PM)

quote:

actually timbit, it has fuck all to do with reading comprehension, it is a matter of being comprehensive <i know the words look similar but they are different>. i mentioned them to cover that base.


If you would quit assuming you know it all when you dont, you wouldnt have that problem.  Questions for clarification can be your friend.  [;)]

quote:

actually timbit, it has fuck all to do with reading comprehension, it is a matter of being comprehensive <i know the words look similar but they are different>. i mentioned them to cover that base.


Sending a child up a tree to retrieve a frisbee has no intent of the child dying from the fall.  However, anyone with common sense would realize the stupidity of that action and not send the kid up.  Watching a toddler shove a fork into the wall socket doesnt indicate an intent to kill.. yet the minute the fork makes contact with current, death can happen.  Beating someone with a hose can cause death, internal injuries with massive internal bleeding... dont need a medical degree to know that.  You can try and worm your way out of that one..  wont work.

quote:

as to them being able to read, that is the whole fucking problem now, isn't it. they read in the book how they should beat their kid with the 1/4" tubing, and that it was not only safe to do so, but both right and godly to do it. so i really don't fucking see how their degree literacy in any way supports your contention.


Their reading literacy has everything to do with it.  Im sorry you are not able to see that.  Most child care books will explain the dangers of such actions. 

The precise definition of murder varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Under the Common Law, or law made by courts, murder was the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. The term malice aforethought did not necessarily mean that the killer planned or premeditated on the killing, or that he or she felt malice toward the victim. Generally, malice aforethought referred to a level of intent or reck-lessness that separated murder from other killings and warranted stiffer punishment.

The definition of murder has evolved over several centuries. Under most modern statutes in the United States, murder comes in four varieties: (1) intentional murder; (2) a killing that resulted from the intent to do serious bodily injury; (3) a killing that resulted from a depraved heart or extreme recklessness; and (4) murder committed by an Accomplice during the commission of, attempt of, or flight from certain felonies.

Some jurisdictions still use the term malice aforethought to define intentional murder, but many have changed or elaborated on the term in order to describe more clearly a murderous state of mind. California has retained the malice aforethought definition of murder (Cal. Penal Code § 187 [West 1996]). It also maintains a statute that defines the term malice. Under section 188 of the California Penal Code, malice is divided into two types: express and implied. Express malice exists "when there is manifested a deliberate intention unlawfully to take away the life of a fellow creature." Malice may be implied by a judge or jury "when no considerable provocation appears, or when the circumstances attending the killing show an abandoned and malignant heart."

In Commonwealth v. LaCava, 783 N.E.2d 812 (Mass. 2003), the defendant, Thomas N. LaCava, was convicted of the deliberate, premeditated murder of his wife. LaCava admitted to the shooting and the killing, but he claimed that due to his diminished mental capacity, he could not form the requisite malice when he committed the killing, so as to be convicted of first degree murder. The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts found that Massachusetts law permits psychiatric evidence to attack the premeditation aspect of murder. However, the judge's instructions to the jury regarding the definition of murder was sufficient to render the error harmless, according to the court.

Many states use the California definition of implied malice to describe an unintentional killing that is charged as murder because the defendant intended to do serious bodily injury, or acted with extreme recklessness. For example, if an aggressor punches a victim in the nose, intending only to injure the victim's face, the aggressor may be charged with murder if the victim dies from the blow. The infliction of serious bodily injury becomes the equivalent of an intent to kill when the victim dies. Although the aggressor in such a case did not have the express desire to kill the victim, he or she would not be charged with assault, but with murder. To understand why, it is helpful to consider the alternative: When a person dies at the hands of an aggressor, it does not sit well with the public conscience to preclude a murder charge simply because the aggressor intended only to do serious bodily injury.

Some murders involving extreme recklessness on the part of the defendant cause extreme public outrage. In People v. Dellinger, 783 P.2d 200 (Cal. 1989), the defendant, Leland Dellinger, was found guilty of the murder of his two-yearold stepdaughter. The primary cause of the child's death was a fractured skull caused by trauma to the head. However, other evidence showed that the child had large quantities of cocaine in her system when she died. Moreover, her mother discovered that the defendant had fed the child wine through a baby bottle. Due to the defendant's "wanton disregard for life," the verdict of murder was proper, according to the California Supreme Court.

A person who unintentionally causes the death of another person also may be charged with murder under the depraved-heart theory. Depraved-heart murder refers to a killing that results from gross negligence. For example, suppose that a man is practicing shooting his gun in his backyard, located in a suburban area. If the man accidentally shoots and kills someone, he can be charged with murder under the depraved-heart theory, if gross Negligence is proven.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Murder

Since you wanted to bring up the legality of intent.



tazzygirl -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/21/2011 11:19:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

To answer the original question, in My opinion, the authors of the book do not hold a legal liability here.  I could write up any ridiculous tripe that I wanted to tomorrow.  It wouldn't be My fault if people were dumb enough to believe it and act on it to the extreme.  There are actually a number of books out there on the concerning the theory of raising children that a number of parents will tell you have some bad advice.

So, the parents did it in the name of God, huh?  Well, in their minds, they probably did.  That didn't make them right.  There is no segment of society that has perfection among it's ranks.  Not Christians, not BDSM folks, not people who have Master's degrees, or any other dang thing. 

I happen to be a person of faith.  I also happen to know that there are other "people of faith" out there who are darn right imbalanced.  No matter how you classify yourself, you've got some twisted folks who identify in the same way that you do.

For the record, I absolutely have popped My kids for incidents that were going to cost them far more than Me slapping them on the hand was a better lesson than them reaching up to find out what the word "hot" really meant or they were just plain fascinated with that electrical outlet.  You're not going to reason with a small child who's brain hasn't developed an attention span of longer than fifteen minutes.  They don't understand cause and effect and that stage.



As usual, LP, I agree completely.



HannahLynHeather -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/21/2011 11:24:01 PM)

quote:

At some point, intent becomes a moot point, despite the fact that they believed God wanted them to do this.
not in the context of our discussion. tazzy was claiming they were not christians because they broke the 6th commandment. intent is the only fucking thing that matters in that context.

i'm not in any way condoning what they did, i'm not really even discussing it. nor am i discussing the contents of the book or the beliefs of it's authors, i made that point way the fuck back at the start of this thread.

what i am doing is contesting drh's & tazzy's claim that the parents and/or authors aren't christians.

do try to actually understand and follow the context of the discussion you are interjecting yourself into.



tazzygirl -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/21/2011 11:25:32 PM)

quote:

They beat her for 70 hours.
They beat her after she vomited.
They beat her after she became unconscious.
They beat her so badly her trauma injuries were like those of earthquake victims.
At some point, intent becomes a moot point, despite the fact that they believed God wanted them to do this.


No intent there at all.... incredible that anyone could believe they lacked intent after all that.



tazzygirl -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/21/2011 11:29:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather

quote:

At some point, intent becomes a moot point, despite the fact that they believed God wanted them to do this.
not in the context of our discussion. tazzy was claiming they were not christians because they broke the 6th commandment. intent is the only fucking thing that matters in that context.

i'm not in any way condoning what they did, i'm not really even discussing it. nor am i discussing the contents of the book or the beliefs of it's authors, i made that point way the fuck back at the start of this thread.

what i am doing is contesting drh's & tazzy's claim that the parents and/or authors aren't christians.

do try to actually understand and follow the context of the discussion you are interjecting yourself into.


And its a contention I will stand by, regardless of your skewed opinions.

There is no way you will ever convince anyone that after all those hours... the vomiting, the unconscious child, and still the beating continued... that there wasnt intent.

THAT is reality.



angelikaJ -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/21/2011 11:35:59 PM)

drh's opinion that they aren't Christian to her is valid.

And you are the one who said it can't be murder because there wasn't intent.
I am saying "intent" doesn't matter... ; that the actions themselves speak to intent.


My maternal grandmother was very fond of saying "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
This is the most apt meaning of that I have ever encountered.



HannahLynHeather -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/21/2011 11:38:44 PM)

quote:

If you would quit assuming you know it all when you dont, you wouldnt have that problem.  Questions for clarification can be your friend. 
why question to clarify when one can simply cover the contingency, there is no know-it-all attitude, in fact just the opposite, i didn't know who you were referring to - see, no assuming i know it all. fail!

being a fucking moron doesn't make one a murderer in the religious context. there is no wiggling involved fuckwit.

what is in other books is of no relevance unless you know for a fact they read those books.
quote:

Since you wanted to bring up the legality of intent.
i didn't. i didn't once mention a thing about legality of anything. the legal definition is of no relevance. i am only discussing whether what they did falls under the 6th commandment, and it doesn't, because in that case their intent is the only thing that matters, because a sin requires intent.

if you want to discuss the legal niceties, find somebody else, i don't know or care enough about us law to give a fuck. if you want to debate the idiocy and just plain evilness of the book, it's authors and the fucking sick-ass excuses of parents, then find somebody else, because i fucking agree with you.

but, they are christians.

reality: 4, tazzy: 0



willbeurdaddy -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/21/2011 11:42:25 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika


quote:

ORIGINAL: TreasureKY

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika

Obviously the comment was offensive to you, and for that I apologize. It unfortunately however change the facts that corporal punishment is more prevelent in that region.


I'm afraid your data doesn't say that, either.


I'll agree that I generalized. The data however says that. I can understand how it's hard to accept.
quote:

Nonetheless, just consider my comments to you as bringing to your attention that prejudice that you say you struggle with.

I will. And it is a struggle considering all the injustice I've seen done in the name of religion (any religion). I know there are good religious types, many in fact, but at the core, I see it as dangerous. I can understand how that is offensive to some, but there is a difference between prejudice and awarness.



Your link doesnt come close to supporting your claim.



HannahLynHeather -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/22/2011 12:00:38 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

They beat her for 70 hours.
They beat her after she vomited.
They beat her after she became unconscious.
They beat her so badly her trauma injuries were like those of earthquake victims.
At some point, intent becomes a moot point, despite the fact that they believed God wanted them to do this.


No intent there at all.... incredible that anyone could believe they lacked intent after all that.

alright tazzy. first a few actual facts from the video.

they beat her over a period of 7 hours, not for 70, the video specifically says so and that there were prayer breaks.
the video has the "father" saying the girl had "swallowed a lot of vomit", nothing about beating her after she vomited
the video mentions nothing about the girl being unconscious during the beating.

before somebody leaps up and says it makes no difference to how horrific the deed was, 70 hours or 7, i agree. but just as i called whoever it was for saying it was a 3/4" pipe, i'm calling you two on your bullshit as well. if you want to discuss something, it's important to have the facts straight, and not get into hyperbole for the sake of it's emotional impact.

there, now that we've got the fucking fact's straight, let's get back to the point.

none of that proves intent to kill in the biblical sense that is required for this to be a breech of the 6th commandment.

they are still christians.

reality: 5, tazzy: 0



willbeurdaddy -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/22/2011 12:06:55 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

They beat her for 70 hours.
They beat her after she vomited.
They beat her after she became unconscious.
They beat her so badly her trauma injuries were like those of earthquake victims.
At some point, intent becomes a moot point, despite the fact that they believed God wanted them to do this.


No intent there at all.... incredible that anyone could believe they lacked intent after all that.

alright tazzy. first a few actual facts from the video.

they beat her over a period of 7 hours, not for 70, the video specifically says so and that there were prayer breaks.
the video has the "father" saying the girl had "swallowed a lot of vomit", nothing about beating her after she vomited
the video mentions nothing about the girl being unconscious during the beating.

before somebody leaps up and says it makes no difference to how horrific the deed was, 70 hours or 7, i agree. but just as i called whoever it was for saying it was a 3/4" pipe, i'm calling you two on your bullshit as well. if you want to discuss something, it's important to have the facts straight, and not get into hyperbole for the sake of it's emotional impact.

there, now that we've got the fucking fact's straight, let's get back to the point.

none of that proves intent to kill in the biblical sense that is required for this to be a breech of the 6th commandment.

they are still christians.

reality: 5, tazzy: 0


My understanding is that even if you intentionally break a commandment that doesnt exclude you from being Christian. Even mortal sins can be repented. Dissociation from someone who's acts are abhorrent to you is nice, but it still doesnt give one (in this case TG) to exclude them from a group that you dont even set the rules for.



tazzygirl -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/22/2011 12:11:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather

quote:

If you would quit assuming you know it all when you dont, you wouldnt have that problem.  Questions for clarification can be your friend. 
why question to clarify when one can simply cover the contingency, there is no know-it-all attitude, in fact just the opposite, i didn't know who you were referring to - see, no assuming i know it all. fail!

being a fucking moron doesn't make one a murderer in the religious context. there is no wiggling involved fuckwit.

what is in other books is of no relevance unless you know for a fact they read those books.
quote:

Since you wanted to bring up the legality of intent.
i didn't. i didn't once mention a thing about legality of anything. the legal definition is of no relevance. i am only discussing whether what they did falls under the 6th commandment, and it doesn't, because in that case their intent is the only thing that matters, because a sin requires intent.

if you want to discuss the legal niceties, find somebody else, i don't know or care enough about us law to give a fuck. if you want to debate the idiocy and just plain evilness of the book, it's authors and the fucking sick-ass excuses of parents, then find somebody else, because i fucking agree with you.

but, they are christians.

reality: 4, tazzy: 0


Intent is a legal definition.

As far as the religious implication, Jesus taught that sin is as much in the intent as the act.  A child who is unconscious requires compassion and medical attention.  Knowledge no one can dispute.  To beat someone in such a condition goes to intent.  70 hours of beating goes directly towards the anger.  3 days.  Consider that and then try and reason with yourself that there was no intent.



HannahLynHeather -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/22/2011 12:15:26 AM)

quote:

drh's opinion that they aren't Christian to her is valid.
no it's not. she doesn't get to define who is and who isn't christain any more than phelps does. the wbc dismisses all others as non christian, is their opinion valid? she may want to disasociate herself from the actions of these people, and who could blame her, i wish i could claim they were of a different fucking species. but just as i would be wrong claiming that, so is anybody claiming they are not christian.

saying it's valid for her is just weaseling, we don't get to define reality in our own terms.

i've done further reading, and it was the parents who called 911, so that pretty much chucks the intent idea out the fucking window.

so now unless anybody has any actual proof of their intent, in the sense required to make this a breech of the commandment not to murder, not the california legal sense, i'm going to consider this one done.

oh, and no, i still don't think the authors have any legal culpability, morally it is all on their fucking hands, however.



HannahLynHeather -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/22/2011 12:17:30 AM)

good fucking points willbe, thank you.



HannahLynHeather -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/22/2011 12:20:14 AM)

quote:

A child who is unconscious requires compassion and medical attention. Knowledge no one can dispute.
they called 911.

quote:

70 hours of beating goes directly towards the anger.  3 days.  Consider that and then try and reason with yourself that there was no intent.
beating over a period of 7 hours, not continuously.

facts, tazzy, please restrict yourself to facts.

reality: 6, tazzy: 0



tazzygirl -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/22/2011 12:41:19 AM)

you are right, it wasnt 70 hours, it was "several", in which the mother held the 7 year old adopted child down and the father beat the child.  Adopted.  Same thing happened to an 11 year old adopted child in their custody.

Prosecutors say that the California couple used quarter-inch plastic tubing to beat their seven-year-old adopted daughter to death.

Apparently, they got the idea from a fundamentalist Christian group, which promotes this as a way of training children to be obedient.

Butte County District Attorney Mike Ramsey says for several hours the 7-year-old was held down by Elizabeth and beaten dozens of times by Kevin on the back of her body which caused massive tissue damage.

"It was torture," says Ramsey.

Another 11-year-old adopted child was allegedly critically beaten for "being a liar and a bad influence on the 7-year-old."

The alleged beating happened on a piece of property in Paradise, Calif., where the three adopted children and the Schatz's six biological children were homeschooled. Paradise is 90 miles north of Sacramento.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-6009742-504083.html

And, thankfully, they both pled guilty, sparing the children of having to testify against them.  Three abused in total.

Couple plead guilty in fatal Paradise child beating By RYAN OLSON – Staff Writer Posted: 04/09/2011 12:05:58 AM PDT OROVILLE — A trial for a Paradise couple facing murder charges for beating one adopted daughter to death and injuring another ended before it began after the pair entered unexpected guilty pleas Friday.

Elizabeth and Kevin Schatz were expected to go to trial Monday in Butte County Superior Court for the Feb. 4 and 5, 2010, beating of adopted daughters Lydia Schatz, 7, and her then 11-year-old sister. Lydia died of her injuries; the older girl required hospitalization but recovered.

The Schatzes’ defense team and Butte County District Attorney Mike Ramsey had spent Friday with Judge Kristen Lucena discussing final motions before starting jury selection. As Ramsey prepared to leave the courtroom, defense attorneys Michael Harvey and Kevin Sears asked him to stay about a possible plea bargain. Court was called back into session and Kevin Schatz pleaded guilty to one count each of second-degree murder, torture and misdemeanor cruelty to a child. He will serve at least 22 years of a 22-to-life prison sentence.

Elizabeth Schatz pleaded guilty to single counts of voluntary manslaughter, infliction of unlawful corporal punishment on a child and misdemeanor cruelty to a child. She will be sentenced to the maximum 13 years, four months in prison.

Both also face a six-month county jail sentence, and $20,000 fines each. If the pair had been convicted on the original charges of first-degree murder and torture, they would’ve each faced maximum sentences of two life terms in prison.

Outside the courtroom, Ramsey said he was satisfied with the verdict and the resolution for the victims — who were reportedly whipped for hours with a length of plumber’s supply line. He remarked that the likely sentences mean the Schatzes would no longer be in control of their children’s lives. “Now, at least for the children, they can get it behind them,” Ramsey said.

Ramsey said he insisted that the couple plead guilty to the charges instead of pleading no contest — where defendants can stand silent while a judge convicts them based on evidence.

The murder and manslaughter charges were for Lydia Schatz’s death. The torture counts applied for her older sister’s injuries. The misdemeanor charges applied for injuries against a son who was 10 at the time.

http://whynottrainachild.com/2011/04/08/plea-deal-schatz-case/

The child's "crime" which deserved such a beating? 

The Schatzes beat 7 year-old Lydia and her 11 year-old sister Zariah repeatedly over a two-day period in February of last year after Lydia allegedly mispronounced a word in a children's book she was reading. 

Zariah required hospitalization but recovered.  Lydia died of her injuries.  During a police search of the house, a length of 15-inch plastic tubing was found on the parents' bed next to a children's book about a frog and a toad.  Authorities say 7-year-old Lydia had been reading from the book when she mispronounced a word, which led to the beatings that continued over two days.
The girls were adopted from a Liberian orphanage four years ago, along with a baby sister.  The couple's six biological children reported that they had also been beaten with the plumbing line but none to the extent of Lydia and Zariah, who were "disciplined" for hours at a time.  The other children reportedly told investigators the parents blamed the 11-year-old Zariah for "being a bad influence" on her younger siblings.

http://www.examiner.com/attachment-parenting-in-mankato/couple-pleads-guilty-no-greater-joy-beating-death-of-child



HannahLynHeather -> RE: Spanked to death in the name of God? (8/22/2011 12:47:00 AM)

they were hideous fucking lunatics. and to be honest, speaking purely on an emotional level, in this particular case i can understand the appeal of the death penalty. if ever anybody needed killing they do.



Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
6.640625E-02