MEDIA never use's the term INNOCENT chlidren in these
ACCIDENTAL deaths, of well I guess the MEDIA would have
to say guilty children.
that is true. i think that is because manny people think, it is all right to kill people we call "guilty". and not all right to kill people we call "innocent". as if it would have been some how better if mcveigh had bombed a group of death row inmates. buy calling the people "innocent" thay are telling people, who think it is all right to kill, that these victims are the wrong ones to kill. the excecutioner must be punished, unlike the executioners that are employed by the state who must be paid. ofcourse we are being tould how to feel about Mcveigh and about the states killers and about the dads who fail to keep there kids alive.
"innocent victim"= hate the killer
"guilty victiom"= love the killer
no mention of I/G = pity the killer
i think you may have picked up on the loaded language the press uses. but your anger was focused on the dads and there deeds.
i'm glad you don't think it is ok to decide to kill and then kill, no matter if you are paid by the state on not.
i am sorry for misunderstanding what you meant. the kind of life lived by the victim or the victiom's deeds have no reveavance, nor are thay a justification to kill. i see your point now. maby if that is it.
if we say that an innocent life has more value then a guilty life.can we not say that a yung life hase more value then a very old life? can we not then say that a cops life hase more value then a robbers life? can we not say that the life of one we love has more value then one we hate? can we not say that the life of a country men hase more value then a foreiner? can we say that not all life is equal? can we say that the life of our one or our own race hase more value then the life of another race?
in the U.S. we do and to what end? dead black men. a police force who investigate the killing of white kids and not black "gangsters". and a sliding scale to assign value to life.