7-Year-Old Suspected In Beating Death Of Baby Sister

WNBC Television ^ | 6/2/2005 | Puppage

[Nataku X]

We can argue death penalty or not all day... but, does anyone here honestly believe that this boy has not crossed a point of no return?

[stormyseas]

Me....no I don't believe that to say that would be to say God has no power. These are just my feelings. Do I think he needs serious help??? ....YES! And probably anyone else who had a serious influence in his life.Do I think he needs to be any where near other children or people, where he is free to do this again, right now, no. Yes I do believe it is our obligation (people as a whole, the system, etc...) to try and help him, you can not claim to love and not. The fact is no matter what opinions are the law says he is too young, not until 16 when committing a crime such as this can we execute, so with that fact at hand, do we throw him away or help him if we can?

[Rippersnapper]

Zack?

[stormyseas]

Zack??? hmmmmm what does this mean? seriously? Who is Zack?

[Nataku X]

I don't believe that to say that would be to say God has no power.

You work on the assumption of an Arminian (non-Calvinist) God. Assuming there is one, my Biblical interpretation is that each time that one rejects the Holy Spirit's call, one makes his/her soul more callous to the point that he/she has committed the Unpardonable Sin. So, both schools of Protestant theology allow for the existence of people who cannot be redeemed.

I believe that there are certain actions that, once done, cannot ever be erased from the human psyche. Meth addiction is one. Animal torture might be another. Malicious murder is another--not justice killings (including revenge), not self-defense, just plain ol' murder.

do we throw him away or help him if we can?

IMHO, executing a 7 year old is like telling a cancer patient "you have only 5 years to live so go ahead and kill yourself." Even if he cannot ever suppress his violent tendencies to interact with society again, he can still lead a productive number of years in a tightly supervised setting carrying out community service, volunteer work, receiving a basic education, all that. Unfortunately all our current solutions (juvenile hall, jailtime, etc.) only serve to harden youth.

[stormyseas]

We can argue death penalty or not all day... but, does anyone here honestly believe that this boy has not crossed a point of no return?

The Unpardonable sin, is as you say, you were asking my opinion or anyones so I just gave what I thought. Yours may be different....:) I was saying....That to say he has crossed the point of no return is to say G-d has no power. I have the faith that G-d can change him. I believe any type of killing is wrong. Again this is my belief. I also believe that certain actions once done can not be taken back, erased from the human psyche, I believe it can never be forgotten, however I do believe we can come to terms with it, through the guidance of the Holy Spirit and learn to apply even the worst things to a positive life for G-d. Look at Paul. As one example. (again these are my feelings not meant to offend any one else)
Also I agree with you 100% about or systems today in reform. There is no help in Jail. The system thinks that to break a man or boy will prevent him from committing other crimes. No they just learn how not to get caught. They become more hardened as you say. As I have been saying, what we are doing isn't working, there has to be something else.

[shhrubbery!]

I agree that the fact that this was a broken family was likely a contributing factor.

Still, this kind of thing does happen occasionally in intact families.

A few years ago in NY there was a little girl who killed her newborn twin brothers in a jealous rage. She took them out of their cribs and smashed them against the floor.

IIRC this happened in an intact Italian-American family. (Though I wonder if the parents are still married today --could any marriage survive such a tragedy?)

[Tempestuous]

When you have one of your kids mudered by another one of your kids, then you can talk.

[Tarkin]

As the 8th Amendment clearly states, not 16, not 15, but 14. But those activist Judges continue to add their own interpretation to the Constitution."

Of course it doesn't state so, but in XVIII century England it was a widely spread belief that children, that are younger than 14 should be exempted from the penalty of death. So I guess that's why Scalia believes so.