Friday, November 12, 2004


The hate-filled hearts of the Left have always been murderous -- from the French Revolution onwards. Post below lifted from Taranto

Meanwhile, over on, the eponymous Web site of the HBO talk-show host, a reader called "moulty" has posted a message to the discussion board under the title "Shooting Republicans, ethical? Discuss" (quoting verbatim):

At this point in time, would it be morally defensible to apply a "final solution" to republicans? Let's face it, when Grover Norquist is doing the media rounds...when his agenda of eliminating all taxes on billionaires and letting the poor pay all taxes and carry the debt burdon, and let them scounge around in the garbage for food...builds character.....when THIS type of criminal extreme right wing "thought" is entering the's time for extreme action.

GW Bush and the American right wing Taliban are endangering the entire planet. If the rest of the world had a say, Bush and Cheney would be in jail. Is it now morally excusable to organize midnight raids on republican groups in the red states and "terminate" them with extreme prejudice?

Watching Bush's acceptance speech on wednesday, with the Cheney's on stage as well....who would not have liked to see a bomb go off under the stage and wipe out the whole despicable slimy lot of them? And hopefully the shrapnel would have gone to the second deck and blown Mary Matalin's head off as well. Be honest. Who would not like to see Karen Hughes run over by an 18 wheel truck? Who wouldn't like to see her carcass scattered all over highway 99?

Good thing liberals are so tolerant, open-minded and inclusive, or there's no telling what they might say or do.


Treating an adult female who voluntarily has sex with a young male as a criminal is the height of absurdity. Only the absurd belief that men and women are the same could underpin an argument that the woman concerned should be punished. Men and women are not the same in the situation described below any more than they are in many other situations. It's the woman who takes the risk in sex so it is only the informed and mature consent of the woman involved that matters. Such consent existed in this case but might not exist where a male teacher had sex with a young girl. In the case below, a realist would say that the young guy just got lucky

"A woman teacher avoided a jail term yesterday after pleading guilty to a sexual relationship with a 15-year-old boy. As she left the Victorian County Court, Karen Louise Ellis, a 37-year-old mother of three, said: "I got exactly what I deserved." Ellis had earlier pleaded guilty to six counts of sexual penetration with a boy under 16. Judge John Smallwood sentenced her to 22 months in jail but wholly suspended the term for three years.

The former Melbourne physical education teacher had repeated sex with the boy at her North Eltham home while her husband was away in October and November last year. The boy's mother contacted police after seeing Ellis and her son "looking like husband and wife" as they left their school in the teacher's car.

Judge Smallwood said the case against Ellis was "greatly different" to the recent case concerning high-profile tennis coach Gavin Hopper, who in August was jailed for more than two years for his affair with an underage schoolgirl in the 1980s. Indeed, the Crown had not suggested the circumstances surrounding the two cases were similar nor that any comparison should be made, he said. Hopper's relationship with his victim began when she was 14 and stretched over two years. Hopper denied the charges from the outset and at the trial, the victim was called "either a liar or mad or both". The trial judge found Hopper had shown no remorse and the victim had suffered greatly.

"Those factors do not exist in this particular situation to anything like the extent they occurred in Hopper and it's my view that in circumstances such as these comparisons are very dangerous," he said. Declaring a degree of mercy appropriate, he told Ellis: "The fallout from your criminal conduct has been enormous." She would never teach again, her reputation had been destroyed and she had been subjected to public ridicule. She was now regarded as a serious sexual offender and her name would go on the sexual offenders' register.

But a victims-of-crime lobby group said the decision not to jail Ellis was a disgrace and revealed gender bias in the justice system. The president of the Crime Victims Association, Noel McNamara, said: "It appears we have one law for one gender and one law for another gender according to the justice system. It was "pretty disgusting" there was such a disparity in two sentences handed down from the bench, and the decision sent the wrong message to victims. "I feel for the boy and his mother," he said. "She has to be concerned that it appears justice is different for her because it was a boy." The president of the Australian Council of State School Organisations, Judith Bundy, said there needed to be consistency in sentencing: "I think it will be a concern for parents," Ms Bundy said. "It's a very difficult issue and people get very emotional.""


No comments: