Child rapists deserve to live... (UPDATED and BUMPED)

 ... or at least, that's what our Supreme Court decided today, in what must be one of the most disgusting rulings ever to come out of that chamber.

The nation's highest court ruled by a 5-4 vote that the death penalty for the crime of raping a child violated the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

Writing for the court majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy said the Constitution barred a state from imposing the death penalty for the rape of a child when the crime did not result, and was not intended to result, in the victim's death.

Kennedy concluded that capital punishment, based on current evolving standards, should be reserved for crimes that take the life of the victim.

Now, I understand that not all cases of child abuse deserve the death penalty. It's hard to conceive, yes, but I do understand the concept. But for anyone to so use a child and exploit their innocence, their inability to fight back is beyond the pale.

Liberals are always going on about "but it's for the children!!!" Well, now you see their true colors: it's all for the children - except when a convicted child rapist's life is at stake. They would far rather pander to the poor feelings of the criminal, and ignore the cries for justice from the innocent victim.

< p>We kill them in the womb, and we deny them righteous justice.

"For the children," indeed.

God help us.

UPDATE: Leslie Carbone has further details about the rape:

An eight-year-old girl woke suddenly in the early hours of March 8, 1998. Five years later, a jury convicted her step-father, Patrick Kennedy, of her rape. According to state of Louisiana prosecutors, she awoke to the sensation of the 300-pound man atop her small body, one hand undressing her, the other covering her mouth. The bleeding and internal injuries the child sustained from the ensuing rape were so great that she required surgery. Afterwards, according to testimony, Mr. Kennedy called his workplace to say that he would not be in because the child had "become a lady"; he then ordered a cleaning service to remove blood from his carpets before calling 911 to report his step-daughter's attack and request an ambulance. [all emph. mine - but make sure you read her whole article]

This decision by the Supreme Court is a disgusting and obscene perversion of justice.

"Justice" Kennedy, when you say that, according to *spit*"evolving standards"*spit* when "the crime did not result, and was not intended to result, in the victim's death" the death penalty is un-Constitutional, you are a moron. Worse, you stab at the heart of the spirit of the Law, which is to protect and, if necessary, avenge the innocent. Sure, Patrick Kennedy may not have intended to kill his step-daughter, but his actions displayed a callousness, selfishness and depravity which truly springs from the most base elements of humanity.

He may not have intended to kill her, but any thinking person could have seen it was a definite possibility.

You, sir, and the other four "justices" who agreed with you disgust me so much for this decision, that in this case I will take a page from Misha's book and quote:

Rope. Tree. Justices.
Some assembly required.

UPDATE 2.0: Yes, I knew Misha would weigh in on this, although he doesn't use his classic phrase -

I’ve had it with those scum-cuddling, sub-retarded liberal activists.

and he links to Stop the ACLU's post, which quotes the press release from Louisiana's Governor, Bobby Jindal:

One thing is clear: the five members of the Court who issued the opinion do not share the same ‘standards of decency’ as the people of Louisiana. One Justice said that ‘the death penalty is not a proportional punishment for the rape of a child.’ That is incredibly absurd. The most repugnant crimes deserve the harshest penalties, and nothing is more repugnant than the brutal rape of an eight-year-old child.

You tell 'em, Gov. Jindal!!

Comments

[Crystal Clear Conservative]

1.

AMEN!! There is a special place in Hell for Patrick Kennedy.

[cargosquid]

2.

That scumbag does deserve a long life in prison. Being beaten awake every morning so that he goes to bed every night KNOWING whats coming the next day. Oh and put him in the general population.....

[Ceecee]

3.

OK so we can't kill these freaks disguised as people. But I can think of something else we can do to them that may permanently put an end to their child-raping days. How about we cut their penises into a lot of little tiny bite sized pieces. If they forced oral sex on their victims, then we can make the child raper eat the above mentioned pieces.

If a lot of physical damage was done (like in the case of the little girl who required surgery afterwards) then we can also smash the child-raper's testicles to smitherenes, using a vice or a mallet.

This will stop most child rapers from ever repeating their crimes. But I understand that sexual gratification is usually not the real motive in these cases anyway. I also understand that where there is a will, there is a way. So if the guy finds a way to get around the handicaps we've given him and rape using an object, these rapes we can handle by taking off his head. That will really stop him.

Oh wait, that will kill him. The court has ruled that's cruel and unusual punishment. I wish the court would rule on whether being raped as a child is cruel and unusual punishment.

I don't think that we should use a rope and a tree on the justices. But I do think that we as a society should decide that the enemies of the children are the enemies of all humanity, and deal with anti-child predators accordingly.

[Kat]

4.

I posted this comment over at my friend, Big Dog's site, and thought I'd reproduce it here:

I know a lot of people are advocating that this monster who raped his step-daughter ought to be sentenced to life without parole and then placed in the prison’s general population, but - though I do see the vengeful attraction of that idea - I would consider that torture. And, one does not torture a rabid animal; one simply puts it down.

Does that make me bloodthirsty? Well, perhaps. But while some might think that’s my attitude, they’re not quite correct. I serve (imperfectly, I confess) a holy and perfect God who hates sin and abhors violence against innocents. While He certainly offers His grace and mercy to ALL who will come to Him, He does not always take away the earthly consequences of the sins we commit.

Therefore, by making this decision, I believe that the justices on the Supreme Court have trampled earthly law and subverted God’s will. I bear the rapist no personal enmity, but his crime is so heinous and at odds with the moral foundation of our society that I cannot see any other appropriate consequence to his actions than the death penalty. I hope that he comes to true repentance and faith whatever happens, but to implicitly minimize the severity of his crime by removing the death penalty does NO ONE in our culture a favor.

It is a shame to all of us as well as a stain on our national character that Justice Kennedy and others like him resort to moral relativism and take the cowardly route.

Therefore, although I can see the attraction in Cargosquid and Ceecee's solutions, and confess that they're tempting, I cannot endorse them. "Vengeance is Mine," saith the Lord - and He has instituted governments on Earth to carry out His vengeance in many areas. In this case, I believe that the laws of the State of Louisiana trump the hubris of the Supreme Court.

[Kashif]

5.

Does it make difference whether the victim is child, teenager or mature. I can not imagine why such highly educated civil society in the world has not passed DEATH PENALTY RULE yet for RAPIST. You have to do it if wanna threat potential rapist. Things like counselling or life time prison is wastage of time, money and resources.

[davef]

6.

Apparently you fools are too ignorant to realize that the death penalty for child rape will just lead to more child murders. A state can only kill you once, so if you commit a crime that will get you executed, why leave a living witness behind. Kill them for a better chance of escape. You were already going to get killed for the rape. Oh, and the death penalty has never done anything to deter the criminals anyways. So all you want is revenge killings, which is exactly what civilized cultures do not do.

[IZealot]

7.

They all got the reasons wrong. It's not about being the most heinous crime, that doesn't even factor, it's about keeping the raped children alive rather than dead. If the pedophile faces death after rape as well as death after rape then murder, he will choose to rape then murder the child because it's a lose-lose situation. If he rapes and murders the child, at least he has a chance of escaping with his life because now there is no witness. Shut up about unconstitional and all that, see that death penalty for child rape is a horrible idea because it leads to child murder.

[Angie]

8.

I feel the Supreme Court has let us down. I can't believe that there is any questioning these monsters deserve less than death. So what if they will suffer more if they are kept alive and in prison? It is a gross waste of taxpayer money to keep these degenerates alive.

I have children. I would kill for my children. Everyone I know would kill for theirs, too. If someone did this to my child, I would have to make sure they didn't find enough peices of him to convict me, because then I may be getting the punishment he deserved in the first place.

[jerry]

9.

Maybe if this happen to the justices children or grandchilden, and they have to live with a poor decision. Ask the Mom's of victims. Education means nothing when common sense is not used.
Warning court out of control!!!!

[janis]

10.

Typical...the death penalty for treason but not for child rape. Since most children raped are female, this is typical of the patriarchal undertones still pervading america society

[Ria]

11.

Thank God most people agree that the supreme courts ruling is a grave miscarriage of justice.

I truly believe that RAPE (of any kind) is punishable by death as is murder.

May God bless our children!

[Jythie]

12.

One of the differences between Judges and Politicians... politicians are the 'good guys', they do what the population wants.. they strive to be popular.

Judges on the other hand have to be the bad guys a lot. They can't just say 'well, the people want this so we will do it it', their job is to say what can and can't legally be done even if it makes people unhappy.

They can't just change the law because the population decides that they are squicked out by something. The law says death penalty can't be applied to these situations and thus it can't.

So show some damn respect for people who are doing a very difficult job and doing it correctly. I doubt any of the justices were happy about the ruling going this way but they did it any way because that is their role in our legal system and they are professional about it.

[karolalyce]

13.

if one of her parents had killed him then they would get the death penalty but he can not get it because it is cruel and unusal punishment but so is raping a 8 year old who has to go through surgery now because of this piece of scum. now as i child i was molested and let me tell you it is a murder of who you were suppose to be. he has stripped her of her self worth, innocence and trust of male adults. i think the supreme court made the decision they made because of a lot of those men are into child sex. that is why no real stiff laws have been written against this sick act. everyone wants to give them therapy once a molester always a molester.

[Someone]

14.

Yes it is a horrible crime, but not something to end a persons life over. I can only imagine how much MORE damage this would do to the victim, if it were a family member that gets put to death because of what happened. As if the rape were not enough to deal with, you people want to add murder on top of it for a child to deal with. All to satisfy your blood lust. You people disgust me.

[William]

15.

Listen, get it through your heads people....Murder is not an appropriate punishment for rape....
You people are sick, sadistic brainless morons - same people that support the Iraq War, the War on Drugs and other atrocities spurred by frenzied lynch mob mentalities ....Governor Jindal has the IQ of GW Bush and a feeble understanding of the US Constitution and law....

[Dan in Iowa]

16.

The Supreme Court decision is disturbing to say the least. Equally disturbing are the states vowing to not follow the decision of the highest court in the land, regardless of whether we believe it is right or wrong. A nation without laws is not a nation. I fear we are sliding into total anarchy. Please don't get me wrong, I'm not defending child rapists or the court's decision.

[MLA in Iowa]

17.

I want to have one person explain how we are to stop these criminals from doing what they do?

As a victim of sexual abuse as a child, we never truly escape the memory. We suffer all our lives no matter what our exterior shows.

These child rapists have absolutely NO FEAR of doing this again and again. They are thrown in prison...get free meals, "help" for something that is incurable, and then set free.

Where do they learn what they do is a crime morally and ethically?? What is a justified punishment??? Death is harsh, I agree. But a prison term is just a smack on the hands.

There really isn't a clear cut answer to this. I want them to suffer but not with death.

[Female]

18.

Only a male would think rape is not much of a crime until they get one up their backside. Only then does a male have a freakin clue. Men have been disgusting pigs since the beginning of time and it appears they will still be that at the end of time.

Female, not all men are "disgusting pigs;" I am married to an honorable and wonderful man who would die before he committed such terrible acts. He is a loving, fantastic Father to our child, and he would defend us both to the end of his strength and to the last breath in his body.

Men, like women, are both good and bad - gee, maybe because we're all human?! - but I truly believe that the vast majority are good people, if not perfect (who of us is?). Please, whatever your past experiences with men, and whatever your opinion of child-rapists is, do not paint ALL men with the same colors, all right?

-- Kat

[Andrew]

19.

What I think everyone is failing to think about, due to all the emotions tied up in this debate, is the alternative. Let's say you had your way and there was a death penalty for child rapists. Yay, all is good and well... well maybe not. If a child rapist knew that he could and probably would get the death penalty for his actions, then tell me, what exactly is stopping him from also murdering the child that he is raping. In his mind, that's one more witness gone and no less severe of a penalty. While we all want to punish the criminal to the highest extent of the law, it might not always be right. We need to leave some incentive for the rapist to not also kill the child. Sure you can argue that the child is emotionally killed from the rape, that may be true but at least they are alive. We all need to realize that rulings are not made just on emotion and because what is right/wrong at the moment, rather we must consider what repercussions might be brought on with our change. To that I think the ruling is fair and intelligent. While child rapists are the scum of the earth, unfortunately we cannot give them the death penalty without the risk of having more children killed.

[Jythie]

20.

@MLA

Now that really is the 65,000$ question. Punishment is all well and good but the ultimate goal is to decrease the chances of it happening in the first place.

Unfortunately american society is really, really screwed up in properly identifying root causes and such. Over the last few decades I've watched multiple waves of people trying to assign the concept of 'pedophile' to one group after another that is 'different' from their social group. Each time it provides some nice high profile 'child rapists are XYZ!'

The reality unfortunately is most child abusers are authoritarian patriarchs of one type or another, usually good solid christians, no previous record, and many honestly don't believe they are doing anything wrong. I've actually met pedophiles (and helped their victims) that will, with a strait face, say they are not actually pedos because they are not gay.

Very very few do it again after getting caught (low rate of re-offense) or even with a second victim in the first place. Unforutnatly the tiny number who do re-offend make headlines so everyone tends to think that is the normal pattern. Heh.. as a rule, anything you read in the news is, by definition, not a normal case and should not be applied to the general population.....

[Wow!]

21.

Unbelievable that an AMERICAN could be upset about the Court's decision. They had no other choice. The Constitution is absolutely clear on this issue: one may be put to death ONLY for committing premeditated murder. Not rape, not even rape of a child. This one was a no-brainer for the Court. The probably deliberated for all of 30 seconds.

Besides, the writers of these laws are complete idiots. Life in prison at hard labor is a much more fitting punishment for these monsters. If you knew how inmates view and treat child molesters, you'd understand this.

[Eric]

22.

You call for the death of human beings and live under the delusion you are doing the work of Christ. Your only fooling yourself and the fools who surround you, the lord sees the hate in your heart.

[John]

23.

Ok, so the Supreme court banned capital punishment for crimes that do not include someone dying. That is fine by me, just because rape of an 8 year old girl is sick ( really sick), that does not give the state, or federal government the right to kill someone. Do not get me wrong, I love capital punishment. But, where does this stop. So, let us just use an example of how your rape death penalty thing might work out. If my 17 year old son and his 16 year old girlfriend have sex, and her dad catches them, reports him to the police, then some over-zealoused prosecuter can charge him with rape ( truly happens) and then seek the death penalty?? That is what might happen if this were not to have been decided the way it was. I agree that raping a child is sick and discusting, and the offenders should be severly punished, but not capital punishment. Where will it end, if you hit your kid and accidentally kill them, do you die...or if accidently your child dies in it's crib from some unknown thing, the parents are taken off behind the courthouse and shot.

Be real people, just because its a sadistic and extremely disturbing crime does not give the state the right to kill. At what age does this statute of death apply? 15, 16 or 17...18..all states have different laws...

If so, then kill all the drunks who have hurt children with the 2,000 lb cars. and while were at it, kill all those preists , rabbi's and clergymen who have sex with kids. And those teachers who have sex with minors in school...kill them all.

Anyone who hurts a kid should die...well if that's what you want...then apply  your thought process to all of those instances.

I think the judges got this one right on the money...

[Jythie]

24.

@John

Oh, and don't forget that sex between minors falls under the same law and child rape (in most states, some have romeo and juliet laws, but those tend to only apply to strait minors),... so maybe every pregnant minor girl and her boyfriend should be put to death.... if they are not then the law is not being applied fairly and it would be challenged.

Considering how many minors have been thrown in jail and have permeant sex-offender status for having sex with another minor.... your point is not as unthinkable as some might think.

[John]

25.

Thank God we have a Supreme Court that is independent from the political branches of the government and all the ignorant blow-hards out there who think they know how the law works. Our original poster, for instance, believes that the law is there to "avenge the innocent"--a notion that hasn't existed in Western Civilization since the Dark Ages. Our law is designed to "punish the guilty and protect the innocent"--a goal that has never been served by the wholesale application of the death penalty to non-lethal crimes. As several posters point out, the only effect of making rape a capital crime is to increase the number of rape-murders in our society, so good luck with your "vengeance."

The OP also seems to believe that this decision was made by "liberal activists", when, in fact, the majority opinion was written by Anthony Kennedy, a Republican appointee, and one of the top ten most conservative justices in our history, according to his voting record. Similarly, Justices Stevens and Souter are well-known political and legal moderates. Only Ginsburg and Breyer could be categorized as "liberal."

"Activism" implies a concerted effort to overturn well-established and widely-accepted laws. In this case, no such thing has happened. Instead, the Court reaffirmed a basic principle of Western law: that captial punishment only applies to capital offenses or "crimes against humanity". And sorry, rape doesn't rank with genocide or treason as one of the latter, no matter how heinous.

Most of you who advocate more capital punishment have never been inside a prison, much less spent most or all of a lifetime there--and you consider it a "light" punishment for reasons that are really beyond comprehension.

Interesting that you disagree with "avenge the innocent," John. Have you considered Romans 13:1-7? According to this passage, the government's job is to bear the sword of justice. Evildoers are supposed to fear this sword.

I also do not believe that the argument that "they're going to do it anyway, so the death penalty isn't proper" is effective. If they're "going to do it anyway," then they still need to be removed from our society. Whether it's done by life imprisonment (and how long is that, really?) or by execution, they need to be taken out.

Now. I'm in favor of the death penalty for this circumstance. This man has been convicted by a jury of his peers through the proper channels of law in Louisiana, and SCOTUS has seen fit to infringe upon states' rights in overturning his sentence.

I do NOT consider life in prison a "light" sentence in this case. If you'd read my comment above, you'd see that there is a very real possibility that I could consider it torture. But, then, in my experience, it's very rare for commenters who disagree with me to actually read me in context. BTW, you may want to check out the rules for commenting; you'd see that tactics like calling me an "ignorant blow-hard" are hardly persuasive, and only serve to make me dismiss your opinion.

-- Kat

[Henry from AL]

26.

The Supreme court is totally out of control and is now dictating law rather than interpreting the constitution as is their constitunal mandate.

[MLA in Iowa]

27.

I want those who say killing sex offenders is against the rule of God. Yes it is...but so is the crime that they are doing to children is against the rules of the Bible. I have read the Bible and understand the word of God.

Put yourself in the situation of finding out your child was abused/raped by an adult. Let me know what your TRUE feelings are? Are they pure thoughts? Would you want retribution for what they had done? Are they biblical thoughts? Do you want them to live to see another day?? Do you want them to repeat this crime again?

Those who live in glass houses should not cast stones...

Until you have been in the shoes of those who have suffered...don't be casting out fire and brimstone.

[John]

28.

p.s. "Crystal"--you don't seem to be entirely "clear" on who you're talking about. Patrick Kennedy is not on the Supreme Court, Anthony Kennedy (a Reagan conservative) is!

[John]

29.

Oh Henry, you don't really know what you're talking about do you? This is the most conservative Supreme Court in our nation's history. Seven of the nine justices are Republican appointees, and four of them are hardcore conservatives. Only two were appointed by a Democrat (Ginsburg and Breyer) and they've rarely been in the majority on any decision. This Court has adamantly refused to "dictate law" even in cases where there were clear Constitutional problems with the laws as written. You must be confusing the U.S. Supreme Court with the Massachusetts Supreme Court--the only one in the country that consistently intervenes in active legislation...

[Jythie]

30.

@MLA

So... you speak for God because YOU understand and others do not?

Have you forgotten about the sections of the bible that actually encourage child rape, or that nice section that says one way to deal with your daughter being raped is to cut her into a bunch of pieces and send those to the perpetrators?

Do not try to pass off your own opinions as God. It is the hight of arrogance. God does not work for you, does not do your bidding, and you are no more his mouth piece then anyone else. You do not worship God, you do not understand God, you are pretending to BE God and thus add weight to your own self. And don't blame your God for your bloodlust.. "I'm sorry, it's not my fault I get off on people suffering! God made me do it! It is his will not mine! i'm nice! really!"

[MLA in Iowa]

31.

@Jythie

Your arrogance astounds me...but given you have placed yourself above mere mortals is not surprising.

Tit for tat and the pot calling the kettle black.

[harv-man]

32.

Father of 2 wonderful and beautiful girls ages 5 and 6.

Hi I am a liberal and believe that the death penalty is appropiate for anyone man or women that violate a child, whether it be molestation or rape. One way or another lets send them to be with the Lord. I can't think of a better place for them to be since we are all God's children. I wonder "God forbid" if something as horrific as rape happen to one of the supreme justices kids, then you would have seen a different ruling in favor of the death penalty.

If this were to happen to one of my little ones, I would pay someone quietly on the inside for the demise of the rapist. I don't care who it is (father, brother, uncle, cousin, sister, mother, grandmother, stranger, anyone. Did I miss anybody.

Harv-man

[Jythie]

33.

@MLA

So...claiming that I don't know what God wants is putting myself above morals? Interesting.

You have stated that you know what God really wants and can speak for him. I've claimed that I don't and no human does and for a human to claim that their opinion is supported by the force of the all mighty makes God a servant of humans. One is putting themselves above God, the other is underneath.

[John]

34.

People, you are getting off track. This law and ruling by the court, is not about God, or Buddha, or the tree out back, or any other religion. It is about the law, and in our country, we separate church from state. Meaning, that just because God says what we should do as Christians, Jews, Catholics, Muslims or Buddhists do does not mean the Supreme Court will follow suit. When a law is passed in a democratic society, it needs to be able to be applied to ALL possible applications under that law. If they passed this law, then anyone of those circumstances listed above where to come true, then this law would put people to death that didn't deserve it. Their is no discussion about religion in law. Your religion, which ever one of those mentioned above, or other ones I left out, means that you hold yourself above the laws of the land. You hold yourself accountable to your God...The laws of the land are a minimum standard if you will, that ensures that you will be able to live your live on this planet in your present form safe from harm and protected by the constitution. The laws of the land protect us from ourselves as well.

So, if your religion says that a someone who rapes or molests a child should die, and those are your beliefs, then in your eyes your God will see that happen, not the court or the great state of ________. (Insert your home state)

[Crystal Clear Conservative]

35.

Hey John,

Get a clue and read Leslie Carbone's piece: http://lesliecarbone.blogspot.com/2008/06/kennedy-v-louisiana.html. You will see the man's name was Patrick Kennedy, so you are not the one who is Crystal Clear.

[John]

36.

Wan not talking aaout Kennedy. Was referring to the Supreme Court's decision.

[John]

37.

Wan not talking aaout Kennedy. Was referring to the Supreme Court's decision.

[harv-man]

38.

Ok folks, if we can't execute the @#$%$#@'s, can we at least cut of their penis's. They will be spending the rest of their life in jail so they will not need it anymore. Or is this a volation of the child rapist rights. This is not a joking matter.

Leave the kids alone....

harv-man

[Jythie]

39.

@harv-man

I am pretty sure that surgical mutilation falls under 'cruel and unusual punishment'.

That would also not cover female abusers.

[Always On Watch]

40.

I personally know two adults who were brutally raped as young children. I knew them as children before they were raped and witnessed the horror of the aftermath as they suffered in every way imaginable. One of these children was a four year old girl when she was raped by her stepfather and her foster father.

Both of the girls I mentioned above never recovered emotionally, even decades later. In effect, their promising lives were taken from them.

SCOTUS has become a mockery of justice, as far as I'm concerned.

[David]

41.

"cruel and unusual"

Always what the "enlightened" will use to excuse coddling monsters.

We need to return to an earlier view of the death penalty, one not primarily focused on punishing the criminal or deter others from like evil but on cleansing society of those who do evil.

Oh, drat and darn and all that. Forgot. "Evil" is a concept the "enlightened" reject as judgemental. Raping children to such as these is just a distasteful lifestyle choice.

*spit*

Kat, I think your response is on target: a "necktie party" hosted by Dr Tarr and Mr Fether seems more and more attractive as our rulers (be they congresscritters, presidents or "justices") seem determined to protect monsters and persecute (or enable persecution by their pet monsters; essentially the same thing) common citizens.

[John]

42.

"Off with their heads", and I do mean all of them!