Erm thanks.
Chat Forum
[closed]
Cherie Blair stops jail sentance because religious people understand wrongdoing
-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
you disagree ?
Posted 2 years ago # -
I am disgusted with the fact that guy got a suspended sentence. I do not care about the fine points of the law in this case. Violence should be punished immediately.
What I find even more disturbing is that so many people accused of violent crimes get granted bail...no wonder so many witnesses are intimidated and dare not testify. Even in jail criminals seem manage to intimidate their victims(see recent cases of facebook threats).
The legal system in this country seems to favour criminals
Posted 2 years ago # -
I take it the guy wasn't black then? otherwise he'd get 5 yrs...
Posted 2 years ago # -
Similarly, genuine psychopaths don't go to prison, they go to secure hospitals - implying that, yes, sentencing differs according to understanding of the rules of society/morality.
Yes, Peter Sutcliffe- The Yorkshire Ripper, was deemed mentally ill by the courts and therefore 'not guilty of murder by diminished responsibility'
He gave evidence at his trial and told the court "God told me to do it [murder prostitutes]".
An example of where religion has played a part in sentencing.(In media spin - The Yorkshire Ripper got off Murder because of his religious beliefs)!
edit: not true the judge wouldn't accept the not guilty on the grounds of diminished responsibility plea. It was Hindley and Braidy I was thinking about. She was deemed sane and him insane.
Posted 2 years ago # -
No, you've just gone off on some tangents. Got folk round now but will explain what I mean later
Posted 2 years ago # -
It's not exactly karma, but...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/feb/05/archbishop-canterbury-blair-iraq-dostoyevskyPosted 2 years ago # -
Come to think of it (sorry I've had a drink watching the Rugby. Yes being intoxicated is no defence in Law- Guilty as charged you honour)!
religion has always been central to the English legal system.When you swear on oath to tell 'the truth, whole truth and nothing but the truth' it is sworn on the Bible.
The crest that appears above the Judge in all courts has the inscription Dieu et mon droit - "God on my right".
Do atheists have immunity from the Law because they reject any religious notion?
Posted 2 years ago # -
You can take an oath with no mention of any deity
Posted 2 years ago # -
cynic-al - Member
You can take an oath with no mention of any deity
Yes agreed, the point I was making was that the oath was based upon religion- the notion of 'God as my Judge'. To further make the point that religion traditionally has long been intertwined with the Criminal Justice and Legal systems.
Therefore if the National Secular Society want to complain about Cherie Blair "letting off" someone for their apparent religiousness it should also be legitimate to question whether atheists can be trusted to be telling the truth in Court as they have no compunction to do so (they effectively pay lip service to the meaning of taking the oath).
These are not my personal views, just find that it throws up some interesting questions.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Stumpyjon; Claims a higher moral standing for people who do not believe in God.
-Then says the guy should have got a tougher sentence because he is religious.By your logic surely he should have been given a softer sentence as he was not obviously in posession of the same level of morality as a non-believer.So why are you annoyed he got away with it?Religion's influence on everyday life
a massive issue
in 2010? Certainly not Christianity in the UK.Anti-religion rant; fail!
Posted 2 years ago # -
atheists can be trusted to be telling the truth in Court as they have no compunction to do so (they effectively pay lip service to the meaning of taking the oath).
Howso? It's an oath to tell the truth, just without mentioning God, Allah etc.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Yes its an oath to tell the truth, but it's based upon religion.
What do you swear on? Childrens life, Cross my heart and hope to die? What compels a Godless person to tell the truth in court?
Conversely it could be argued that in our increasingly secular society the oath has become redundant and should be removed.
General point being that religion has/does play a part in the Criminal Justice System, so why the hue & cry over Cherie Blair using it to demonstrate someone is of good character? (it certainly doesn't mean the opposite, that atheists cannot be of good character).
Posted 2 years ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
