Skip to main content

I Will Be The Bearer Of Reasonable Bad News

I was over at Power Line blog. Every political conservative has read something good from there at some point in the last dozen years, give or take. Those are smart guys, good guys. Here's my thought, re: Freddie Gray: Can I have one human thought about a guy that died under circumstances that he shouldn't have, before I take my position on the highly-polarized battle-lines of American politics?

I mean, really. The comments. I just feel so dirty.

I'm not even averse to believing:

A. Gray was a really bad guy;

B. The prosecutor is trying to do more than the evidence warrants;

C. She is incompetent;

D. So is Obama.

But let's take a step back, because we're missing one key point. Feel free to sit down. You'll need to. Are you ready?

People aren't supposed to die in the custody of the police. Ever. If the Boston bomber now convicted died while awaiting trial, wouldn't you be alarmed? This is America, right? Let's take another example, shall we?

Atticus Finch. Let us forget a couple of things, firstly, that Atticus acted heroically in a completely righteous cause, and that he's fictional. Isn't part of Atticus' heroism not only that he'd defend the dignity of a black man in the cause of justice, but that he would do it in spite of the fact that most everyone thinks he shouldn't? He is willing to sacrifice his own name among men, because justice is more important than reputation. We're not supposed to be OK with the vigilantes that come to kill Tom Robinson, even if he were guilty as sin.

So...

What relevance does Freddie Gray's police record have for the fact that agents of the US government have killed someone in their custody? And your grievance against the relative influence of left-liberalism has no bearing on the dignity of this person. It just doesn't.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...

Dear Alyse

 Today, you’re 35. Or at least you would be, in this place. You probably know this, but we’re OK. Not great, but OK. We know you wouldn’t want us moping around and weeping all the time. We try not to. Actually, I guess part of the problem is that you didn’t know how much we loved you. And that you didn’t know how to love yourself. I hope you have gotten to Love by now. Not a place, but fills everything in every way. I’m not Him, but he probably said, “Dear daughter/sister, you have been terribly hard on yourself. Rest now, and be at peace.” Anyway, teaching is going well, and I tell the kids all about you. They all say you are pretty. I usually can keep the boys from saying something gross for a few seconds. Mom and I are going to the game tonight. And like 6 more times, before I go back to South Carolina. I have seen Nicky twice, but I myself haven’t seen your younger kids. Bob took pictures of the day we said goodbye, and we did a family picture at the Abbey. I literally almost a...

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...