Perhaps it may turn out a sang,
Perhaps turn out a sermon.

-- R. Burns Epistle to a Young Friend

Saturday, December 15, 2012

Between the Evil and the Good (Updated)

Proverbs 17:15 (HCSB) -- Acquitting the guilty and condemning the just -- both are detestable to the LORD.

First, any politician who makes the horrific murder of twenty little children about gun control, either way, for any kind of political gain should be taken out and shot.

Similarly, to the drug-addled whores and sodomites of Hollywood with your ridiculous comments that miss the whole point, I suggest that you be tarred and feathered.  You have no use for morality or restraint of any kind.  You unleash your "outrage" over something like this, but you are silent about the obvious corruption of the human soul that leads to it, corruption that you wallow in like the swine you are.  I don't tell you how to live so shut up. 

Second, the murderer was not "troubled".  Troubled people walk around with underwear on their heads or get lots of tattoos and piercings.  Murdering a five-year-old isn't a sign someone is troubled or mentally ill.  It means that person is evil -- if evil is to mean anything at all.  Evil, too, are the people who enable an evil person to walk around free and work his evil deeds.

The proliferation of psychoactive drugs coupled with the attempt to treat people within the community may contribute to some of the violence.  The truth is, despite efforts by drug companies and the FDA to understand the effects of these drugs, adverse events are associated with all of them.  Individuals have different responses to the chemicals.  Sometimes the responses change over time.  Just as a significant percentage of physical problems are caused by the unintended effects of medications, so, too, with medications for those with psychiatric problems.  Residential care may be the best approach in some cases, but no one should simply be handed psychotropic drugs as if they were candy and turned loose on the street.

Oh, and while I'm at it, congratulations to the atheists  who sued to have the Ten Commandments removed from the walls of government schools because the words were taken from a book you don't believe was written by a god you don't believe exists.  Would it be possible for us to agree that it might not be all that bad to teach young people "You shall not murder" is an important idea regardless of the source?  If you want to disregard the part about "no other God", graven images and such, that's up to you.  Not killing, stealing, wronging others, and not disrespecting parental authority are concepts that are essential if we are going to live together in some semblance of civilization.

There is no political solution to this kind of a problem.  There is a moral and spiritual solution.   It requires us to repent and throw out Freud and all the other relativistic secular and satanic philosophies of the last century or two.  It requires us to stop looking at government as God and laws as morality.  Government is a human construct that works well enough so long as it is contained and controlled.  We can, to some limited extent, legislate behavior.  We can use government to to help us get beyond the law of the jungle.  We cannot use laws to define right and wrong.  First, we must know what is right then write our laws accordingly.

We do not live in a "safe" world.  No one is ever guaranteed life, liberty or the pursuit of happiness.  We do the best we can.  We make mistakes.  The more power we have over others, the more severe the consequences of our mistakes.

We need a revival of absolute moral standards.  We need to instill in our children the belief that humans, for whatever reason, are indeed special creatures.  We have a responsibility to live right, to treat others right, to respect the lives and liberty of others, and to demand that others do the same for us.  And we need to be prepared to shield ourselves and our fellow travelers from those who would threaten life and liberty.  It doesn't matter if those who would destroy do so because they are judged insane or evil or demon-possessed -- or if they are politicians who are mostly wicked and crazed.  We have to shut them down.

Anyone who is unwilling or unable to live according to the simple standards enshrined in documents like the Ten Commandments and the Bill of Rights cannot be allowed to live among us.  If they cannot restrain themselves, they must be restrained. 

UPDATE:  It occurred to me after spewing this that I had not stated explicitly something that was clear in my head as I wrote.  I am not suggesting that people with autism or other syndromes be locked away in institutions.  My point is that the murderer did not perpetrate this horrendous acts because he had autism or some other misdiagnosed mental disorder.  He did it because he was evil.  He knowingly and willfully did something horribly wrong either because he thought it was right (psychotic) or because he did not care (sociopath).  The medication may have been a factor, but people with all kinds of psychiatric problems, taking all kinds of drugs do NOT commit unspeakable acts of violence on a regular basis.  There is no excuse.

One more thing I will mention.  In cases like this, someone invariably brings up a government conspiracy and mind-control.  I don't buy that.  I think it is stupid.  However, my late brother-in-law had been in the Marines.  He got through basic and served about a year afterward, being promoted to Lance Corporal.  He was then given an honorable, medically-based discharge after being struck by a car while he was falling-down drunk one night in Washington, D.C.  He was then diagnosed with a psychiatric disorder and given a very substantial disability check from the Corps.  He told several of us at various times that he had taken "acid" under orders as part of an "experiment" while he was in the hospital.  I always dismissed this as crazy talk, but I must admit, he had been very high-functioning most of his life prior to the accident and his extended stay in the hospital (probably Walter Reed -- I can't recall).  The fact that he remained on 100% disability for nearly thirty years until his death seems quite compassionate and understanding on the part of the VA -- if you know what I mean.  I still don't believe in the mind-control crap, but I certainly don't know everything.  

    

4 comments:

Rick said...

A number of years ago we worked on a documentary program about a US submarine that sank in I think the 60s and to this day it is still a mystery as to what precisely was the cause. I got to spend some time with a wise old engineer who was involved in the lengthy, numerous investigations. He told me, "You know, submarines are very deceiving; so simple looking on the outside. Very complex on the inside." His opinion was that there was no single, initiating cause, but rather, several failures at once or in a chain.
This event in CT reminds me of it. Perhaps there were several single causes.
So much has been said already. We want the thing to not have happened. That's what we want. But the closest thing we can do is stop the next one. But we won't do what it takes, even if it would work. Our regard for human life is in decline. That is undeniable even if it played no part in this crime. To that crazy, evil kid he thought it was an option. To him it was good. Where does one get such ideas.
There seems to be some cosmic messenger in that we can't interview the shooter or his mother. Perhaps because we might believe them; as if they know. This forces us to rely on Reality.

mushroom said...

You're right there is no simple reason or explanation. Every event is the culmination of a chain of events that gets linked into a new chain.

A fallen world filled with beauty and tragedy.

Bob's Blog said...

Excellent writing, Mushroom.

I wanted to comment on the acid treatment your brother described.

In 1964-65 I worked at the V.A. Hospital in Topeka, while a graduate student in social work at K.U. Topeka, of course, was the home base of Dr. Karl Menninger. Psychiatrists from all over the world came there to study with "Dr. Karl." Someone came up with the bright idea to give the vets acid, under the care of a psychiatrist, who administered the drug and sat there with the patient, while the patient went on a trip. I was the social worker assigned to work with the families of the vets. I thought the whole thing was nuts.

mushroom said...

Thanks, Bob. I do remember reading about Menninger's work. It's interesting to know that you were involved in that, and I think your assessment is right -- it was nuts.

It also would not surprise me to find out that work like that with various psychoactive drugs was continued for quite some time. The Department of Defense seems to always be able to find money to fund "cutting edge" research.