Posted on 07/01/2009 11:21:57 AM PDT by Maelstorm
Seems to be gone, now- reckon they scrubbed it? Glad you got some of it.
“Seems to be gone ...”
It’s back up now on the Chronicle site (the second comment in the thread and the first of two by “Jenny.”)
Thank you.
I do not believe white racism is "natural", nor that erasing it was Lombard's motivation. He was quoted in his conversations with police as saying that black children are easier to adopt. If anything, his actions affirm his racism.
My statement about Lombard’s possible personal belief system comes from looking over his Amazon reading list. That list has been pulled from Amazon. It was mostly homosexual hard core, with a significant minority of books about racism and black American identity. And also, iirc, some books for children. Depraved.
I don’t agree with your conclusion from the reading list, which I also viewed. White, gay Frank Lombard was sexually exploiting a black child from infancy, and I am not buying yours or anyone’s redemptive psychoanalytical rationales for the evil intentions behind his evil actions.
The motivation doesn’t matter, except as it comments upon the insanity of “race-based” ethics.
bump to the top
Words have meaning. Words always matter. Words are what will be used to defend this vile individual in a court of law. Words posted on this web site get bandied on television these days. It matters to me what gets said about this case and how our FR community views the incomprehensible evil of adopting a powerless, dependent child for the purpose of raping him from infancy onward, clearly with the knowledge of wrongdoing, since the "perv dad" took pains either to conceal his acts from his partner, or to cover for his partner's involvement.
The child's race is an issue because of Lombard's statements to the sting cop that it was easier to adopt a black child; and also because of the recent past's racist feeding frenzy the Duke community engaged in when characterizing white lacrosse players as guilty racists when, in fact, they were innocent of the charges, and should have had the benefit of a presumption of innocence. This case, where the gay male "perv dad" admitted his culpability to the arresting officer, is receiving hands-off treatment both from Duke and from the media. Those are the criminal and social issues. As for his psychology, pffffffft. Evil is evil. There was simply no excuse; and none should be made at his trial.
It is also vile that the newspapers keep printing as a foregone conclusion that his maximum sentence will only be 20 years. The child has been subjected to a lifetime of crippled development.
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.