Spiderfish

When I first read your post...yes, but after considering the context...no.

I can't believe this joke is proceeding. I thought we wouldn't have heard any more about it after they filed in March. Guess I was wrong. Albino Rhino Violates Human Rights

I listened a radio interview with Ashu Solo with interest last week. What I found particularly interesting was his opposition to relaying a secular message in a public display and his assumption that people of other religious faiths, or no faiths at all would take insult. The funny thing is that last week, when I was listening to this same argument by Mr. Solo, he declared that this practice wasn't "kosher". I wonder how kosher he feels this expressive contradiction is to the argument he's putting forward. Perhaps someone should ask him, and let him know that now that his statement is out in the public, I have a podcast of the show that I would be more than willing to submit to the human rights commission on behalf of non Jewish people everywhere.

You call it hedging, I call it clarifying a position. Obviously I wasn't successful.

Again, lack of comprehension. What personal insults??? I said... You said... Clearly you erred in your comprehension of what I wrote...It happens, don't take it personally.

I didn't say that. What doesn't make sense is your lack of comprehension of the written word (or your enthusiasm to distort what is said to enforce an argument, not sure which it is). Doctors make mistakes all the time. Maybe they will get this one right, maybe not. My opinion, though not a professional one, is that the risk is not worth it for anyone involved.

Actually, I'm not sure my conclusion does differ from the doctors. I think it's the willingness to accept the risk and potential consequences that differs.

I came to such a different conclusion because unlike the "experts" and doctors, my interest is not just from the perspective of the killer, but of their victims and the innocent public. It's quite possible that the experts have every confidence in management tools such as medication. It's a gamble they are willing to accept to allow the individual his or her freedom...a gamble that has the potential to affect innocent people very negatively. It's an easy gamble to make when you have no skin in the game. I'm sure the victims families have a different take on the matter.

I argue that Turcotte poses a high risk to everyone, including himself. It is well known that people with mental and psycological issues have some of the highest rates of suicide of any other segment of the population. If we really want to act on compassion, we should bear this in mind. I'm not talking about throwing him in prison. there are many high security hospitals in this country that would ensure the safety of all and manage his illness successfully and compassionately.

I don't know if mental illness can be cured. It can be managed, but I don't see medication, etc. as an acceptable solution when the stakes are so high. I certainly don't think it's practical to wager the safety of innocent lives...including the individual's on such a gamble.

It may be.

I have already answered that question.

I agree. but the problem here isn't even in the sentencing, it's releasing him on the premise that he's been cured.

People with mental disorders apperently don't commit crimes. but no, we can't see into the future. we can, however, prevent successive damage from being done after the initial offense against the innocent public has been commited.

Did the jury decide to grant him his release after 18 months? No. regardless of the NCR decision, the problem seems to be with the people who made the decision to release him, not the jury.

If they are killers, segregation from the public at large is likely not a unrealistic option, both for the safety of the public, and for the safety of the individual.

It is more frightneing because at least we can hold someone to account for their actions if they have a healthy mind. Their actions can be quantified, and society has the ability to segregate them for the safety of the greater public. This does not seem to be the case if they have a mental issue.

Maybe if he kills again he will be found criminally responsible next go-around. I feel much better.

Physicians and ultrasound technicians in both Alberta and Manitoba on different occasions refused to tell. I even asked the ultrasound technician to "blink once for male and twice for female" since she wouldn't spill the beans...she just stared at me mildly amused but defiant. We found out the gender of our second kid as a result of being referred for a second, more comprehensive ultrasound, after tests came back showing some markers for Downs Syndorme. Thank god we didn't decide to terminate him!

I thought this practice was already in place in this country. The doctors and ultra sound technicians refused to give out the gender of any of my kids, even when asked repeatedly.

I truly hope that people facing the decision of terminating a healthy fetus take the situation a little more seriously than that, or we have way bigger societal issues than just the abortion issue.

I'm not saying it is. I think abortion based on mental capacity would be a worthy discussion to have as well.

So...Abortion is not illegal in this country. If the doctor announces that your fetus has 6 out of 18 markers for Downs Syndrome giving it a high risk for being born with Downs, the parent has the choice on whether they wish to abort a potentially healthy baby or not. It's a moral issue that the parents must confront, and the government has no business in that decision under the current laws of the land. Gender selection, however, is a moral issue that Mr. Warawa has indicated he feels should be a matter of the government, and therefore he has contended should be discussed by the government.

These tests are not conclusive, they merely test for "markers" that are associated with these conditions. I don't see this motion that was brought up by Mr. Warawa as an attempt at openinga debate on the abortion issue as much as I see it as an attempt at opening a debate on gender selection and the obvious moral issues that surround it.

Cruel...yes. Funny...definitely. I hope they had EMS on stand-by just in case.