Tuesday, June 29, 2010
John Gardner was sentenced about a month ago to life in prison for the rape and murder of two teenage girls.
In a televised interview a month before sentencing, click above to view, he explained "I could not stop myself. I was — had a major rage, and (was) pissed off, and pissed off at my whole life and everybody that’s hurt me."
Can any atheist explain to me: Why should he be punished? Isn't he indeed correct - none of us actually has a soul or free will and therefore we are not in control and therefore no punishment is appropriate? A distinguished biology professor wrote recently "a belief in free will is nothing other than a continuing belief in vitalism—something biologists proudly believe they discarded well over 100 years ago."
If the purpose of punishment is not because society has the right to retaliate against wrongdoers, but rather the purpose of punishment is merely to deter future criminals, then why must the punishment fit the crime and why must the accused be proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt before being punished? No one is actually guilty anyway. Rather a team of sociologists should simply determine what level of government sponsored terror will do the most good with the least cost and the police should follow those guidelines. Perhaps summarily hanging each year a few hundred likely suspects would overall be more beneficial and inexpensive than the massive and costly criminal justice system we have today. (The Soviet government actually did do this in the late 1930's.)
If a tornado kills two people, it's hardly noticed. It's just a force of nature. According to atheists, Gardner is no different.
The tragedy is that once atheists convince themselves of this insanity, as Gardner did, then they can and will indeed kill and with no guilt.
Personally, I agree with the more old fashioned opinion of Maurice Dubois, father of 14 year old victim Amber Dubois "He will burn in hell for the acts he's committed."
Posted by jewish philosopher at 5:23 PM