Is it possible to get redemption after committing a heinous crime...?

[kentuck]

...such as the bombing in Boston?

People of the Christian faith may think so? Would it ever be possible to do enough good deeds for society to redeem oneself from such crimes?

[marions ghost]

1. what's your definition of redemption?

-----

[NoPasaran]

2. It isn't easy

Forty years later, Jane Fonda is still "Hanoi Jane" to some.

[geek tragedy]

6. Jane Fonda never bruised anyone, let alone massacred and dismembered. nt

[AngryAmish]

23. She did aid the N. Vietnamese war effort.

the NV were going to win the war. It just depended on the terms - partition or unification. Since she helped get the US out of the war it meant unification. The ethnic Chinese in the south and the ruling class down there had a pretty bad time of it - remember the Boat People? The reeducation camps? That was sorta bloody.

[geek tragedy]

24. It was propaganda, not murder. nt

[AngryAmish]

25. Propaganda does not aid an overall war effort?

[geek tragedy]

26. First Amendment covers speech, not bombs for a reason. nt

[AngryAmish]

27. There I don't understand you

It is clear that she aided to NV war effort - why else was she there? No one said she could not do it but her words and deeds ended up having a pretty bad ending for many folks in South Vietnam.

That is what she gets to live with in her multiple mansions and private jets.

[kentuck]

28. How did she specifically aid the NV war effort?

Can you explain?

[AngryAmish]

29. She was used in NV propoganda

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Fonda#.22Hanoi_Jane.22_controversy

[kentuck]

32. And how did that help them?

Did she do more damage than the My Lai massacre, for example?

[AngryAmish]

34. Are you arguing that wartime propaganda is not effective?

[kentuck]

36. Do you mean like?

Ho Chi Minh fashioned the North Vietnam Constitution after the Constitution of the United States?

Or the North Vietnamese attempted to bomb one of our ships in Haiphong Harbor?

That kind of propaganda?

All propaganda is not false or bad.

[AngryAmish]

43. Propaganda is a weapon of war

By itself it is neither good nor bad. It is. My point above is that she helped the NV war effort by being used in their propaganda. NV won the war on their terms. A whole lot of folks were harmed in their winning of the war. Was that less harmful than a partition? We do not know. So when one states that JF did nothing harmful by her actions then that is patently untrue. ANd many folks will not forgive her because of the harm she contributed to.

[kentuck]

45. Then we have to ask, was it a "just" war?

If not, which was the good propaganda and which was the bad??

[AngryAmish]

48. It was just a continuation of the war that has been going on for a few thousand years

A unified Vietnam under Vietnamese control is kinda a new thing. For most of their history Vietnam has been under Chinese control. There were the Mongol invasions, various kings and the sort. The French stopped by. Typical stuff.

The Communist Party of Vietnam is just the window dressing that puts the Kihn ethnic group in charge. It keeps a lid on the other ethnic groups who would like their own territory. For good or ill this is the way modern nations states are run.

So was it a just war? I personally find the idea of just war to be farcical. Wars are fought for winning and whatever justification we use in our minds are just excuses. SO NV thought their war was just, SV thought their war was just, and so on and so on.

[kentuck]

52. But many in America did not think it was a just war...

I was there. I remember a little about it. Perhaps it was the times? Perhaps it was our youth? Perhaps it was the music? But we were not as accepting of war as the "norm" anymore. We asked "why"?

[HiPointDem]

76. that was all jane fonda's fault. if not for her corrupting youth, the US would have won.

[AngryAmish]

81. You do realize the US was incidental in this war?

THis is a very long war that the US participated for all sorts of fucked up reasons at the very end. In the end, the main ethnic group won and established a hegemony over a rather large bit of land. So far they have held it. The Khmer tried to take back the Mekong Delta in the late 70s. Viet fought back, deposed the Khmer Rouge and they have be quiet ever since. THey even fought a short war with their traditional hegemons, the Han Chinese. The main ethnic group, Kihn or Viet, runs the communist party and is in charge of doling out the spoils, such as they are. The minority groups get shafted - that is why as many as they could got out. This is the way of the world and always will be the way of the world.


So, the US was never going to win that war. ANyone with eyes could see that - and I, with the benefit of hindsight, can see it.

[timdog44]

35. Good responses all the way

down the line. She made have an error in judgment, in fact I think she admits to that, but aiding the enemy is a little far fetched. It was an atrocious war and sparks a lot of hot buttons. A lot of the guys who were there and survived like to belittle her. I suppose it makes them look better in their own eyes. A lot of them are not angry at her at all. It all boils down to whether the basic philosophy is left leaning or right leaning. I know both. And highly decorated. And they are on totally different sides of the fence.

I know people who are still mad about WW2 and won't go near a Japanese made product. Until all of the participants die, the hate will live on.

[leftynyc]

44. She wasn't arrested

so I'm not sure what the first amendment has to do with anything. She did something incredibly insensitive and downright stupid and has been paying for it ever since. And yes, I do believe she gave comfort to the enemy.

[tblue]

79. They used her picture.

She didn't. She has said over and over she wishes she had never posed for that pic, it was a huge lapse of judgment. She also took pics with our troops and has done a lot to support veterans over many years. I'm not buying the propaganda about the propaganda. Jane is a wonderful person and a great American. It's not like she kept doing it or even defended it.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

41. Apparently she's a fundi now

So I guess she's redeemed or something.

[NoPasaran]

46. Barbarella a fundie?

NNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooo!!!!!!!!!

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

47. Ted claimed she got very religious midway thru their marriage

Granted, he's an asshole drunk, but who knows?

[CBGLuthier]

54. I love the way everyone knows so much about other people's lives

especially people they have never met.

I do believe that parable about walking a mile in another man's shoes has finally been killed as the foolish sentiment it was all along.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

71. I'm just reporting what was reported by the women's husband

Take it up with him when you climb off the soapbox.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

65. Not a fundy --

Religious lefty -- still supports women's rights, LGBT.

[librechik]

3. ask Shrub. He seems to be doing fine with his crimes.

being a sociopath means never having to say you're sorry--or feeling as if you should, ever.

[Duer 157099]

4. Yes

The way I look at it is the end result of the crime is the same whatever the intent. So, if those victims had died from an accidental explosion (as in, say, Texas...) the result would still be that they are dead.

If the perp has a life-altering epiphany that causes him to dedicate the remainder of his life to doing good, then I think that could be considered redemption. Most likely it would all occur behind bars, but there is plenty of good that needs to be done in prisons.

Just mho.

[tblue]

80. It's MHO too.

About the perp, I mean. This kid is a mess right now and it's hard for us to see anything worth redeeming in him. But, for those who believe in a God of any stripe, how do we know this is not a test sent to measure the worthiness of your soul?

I always think that. Maybe this is a test.

[geek tragedy]

5. To society, no. Religious people can come up with their own standards,

but Tsarnaev is and will always be a sadistic murderer to society. That's all he will be. Until he's either executed, or imprisoned for life, and then utterly forgotten.

[snooper2]

7. depends on who is doing the redeeming...

Since we smart people have figured there are no "god creatures floating in the heavens"....you only have society and individual humans to perform that task.


Take the Michael Vick case for example, some here still want him to be sitting in a prison cell-

[Blue_In_AK]

8. I don't go to church anymore,

but I do believe in the possibility of redemption. Not that everyone will accept that the criminal has truly changed, but what matters is what's in his heart. This is why I don't believe in the death penalty. I think everyone should be given the chance to come to grips with their misdeeds and make whatever amends they can.

Can't get away from that Quaker upbringing no matter how hard I try.

[Warpy]

9. Yes, especially if the heinous acts were committed

when the person was young and/or under the influence of a religious or political group.

Bill Ayers redeemed himself, for instance. So did a lot of the kids who fought in Vietnam, faced those demons, and went on to live good lives. So did many on both sides in South Africa, but they were lucky enough to have a formal reconciliation program.

In fact, were redemption in life impossible, war would have utterly destroyed us and made us an extinct species long ago.

[Yo_Mama]

10. Depends on what you mean

According to the Christian faith, it is possible to get spiritual forgiveness with repentance, reform and acceptance of God's mercy. That changes generally your fate after death rather than in this life.

I don't know about other religions, but in a non-religious sense I think a person could change. If their beliefs change, they could change their definition of right and wrong. I think there is a tremendous amount of courage required to do that, because to do that would be accepting full responsibility and full guilt for what he has done. That would be a crushing burden to bear for anyone. It's far easier to go through what's left of his life maintaining that he had a good reason for killing that kid, isn't it?

I don't think he would ever be qualified to be a free man, though. First, it's hard for those making such a decision to know if he has really changed. Public safety has to be paramount. Second, I think public support for removing the death penalty is strongly dependent on real life terms for some crimes - people genuinely do fear that heinous offenders will get back out and destroy more lives, and it certainly has happened enough to make such a fear not wholly irrational.

But who knows? It would be nice to think that Tsarnaev could change enough to be imprisoned in a less severe environment while still preserving the safety of others with whom he could come in contact. And maybe that could allow him the opportunity to do something more productive with his life.

[sinkingfeeling]

11. Society allows for redemption. There are hundreds of people who were

convicted of brutal crimes, like murder, rape, and assault, that did their time and never returned to crime. Apparently, if one is Christian, all they have to do is request forgiveness and 'commit themselves to Christ'.

[DonViejo]

12. In the Roman Catholic faith, yes...

if you ask for forgiveness

[Sekhmets Daughter]

13. I think the entire concept of redemption was devised

to excuse the most atrocious behaviors.

It is a cruel hoax responsible for the most heinous of crimes and the most brutal behaviors.

[Tom Ripley]

19. +1

[backscatter712]

49. +2! n/t

[REP]

53. Constantine is said to have converted to Christianity after murdering his son and wife

because it was the only religion that would forgive him for his crimes.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

70. Exactly....

and people, including those within the church, have been ta=king advantage of it since the beginning. Think of Torquemada and the Spanish Inquisition.

[Hekate]

14. Only with God, okay? I've given this some thought over the years

Some crimes cut you out of the human herd, and we have the right to dispense justice for past deeds and to protect ourselves from you in the future.

Having said that, and given the sometimes barbaric nature of human justice (chopping a hand off a petty thief, torture, stoning, more torture, burning alive), I'm with the US Constitution. The men who wrote it knew their history and I think were clear-eyed about human nature. Laws need restraint, too.

We have a system of laws to protect us not only from criminals but from our impulses toward revenge. Lynch mobs are illegal, always have been, and now we seldom see them any more. (Do you have the right person? Who cares, the sheriff caught him, so he must be guilty. Clem, you bring the rope.)

But let an occasion like this arise, and the mob forms and smells blood. It happens on the Internet too, just look around you.

I will stick with the slow workings of civilian law, thank you.

So -- redemption. It happens in the soul. Even in prison, a person has the opportunity to redeem themselves, choose good instead of evil, to pray. And if it takes them the rest of their lives, so be it.

Hekate

[get the red out]

39. Excellent post

Thank you. Probably the best thing I've read all day.

[kentuck]

42. I would agree.

An excellent post.

[Tien1985]

15. I just don't hold redemption

As something that should be important to "society". Redemption, in my opinion, is completely personal. Say a person commits a smaller but still dangerous crime, like robbery. They have a trial, are sentenced and do their time. Then they're released. Honestly, if that person never tries to commit robbery (or any other crime) again, but never does any good deeds--who cares? It's their life to waste or redeem as they see fit.

As far as the bomber, the situation becomes does his ability to possibly behave himself out weigh other people's right to relative safety in public spaces. If he is proven guilty, I'd say no. Keep him locked up until he dies to protect the rest of the law abiding, non lethal population. If he redeems himself while in prison (this is NOT sarcasm) good for him! I'll be glad for him, sincerely. That should have no bearing whatsoever on his sentence.

[oldhippie]

16. NO

nt

[msongs]

17. mein furher if you confess your sins all is forgiven and you will go to heaven despite your "sins" n

[yawnmaster]

63. That's really not how it works. Speaking words of confession would not be enough...

It requires true repentance to go along with the confession.
Then, yes, divine redemption is possible for all.

[LanternWaste]

69. Reading the back of cereal box may not actually give you the breadth of information you presume it d

Reading the back of cereal box may not actually give you the breadth of information you presume it does...

[Warren DeMontague]

18. I don't know. Seems to me an essential part of "redemption" is paying the price for what you did.

In the case of the Boston bombing, at best I think that ought to be spending the rest of one's life in a small concrete cell.

[Zorra]

20. It is my understanding that many Christians believe in a "born again of the spirit" experience,

when an individual undergoes a drastic change of consciousness due to an experience of a personal revelation of the nature of Christ, and from that point forward asks God for forgiveness for all the wrongs they have done, and thereafter actively seeks to be the best person they can. After this experience, their past sins are forgiven, and they can gain entrance to heaven.

This is only a form of personal spiritual redemption; a change of heart, it might be called. Going out and doing good deeds for others is primarily irrelevant to this experience of redemption, but may be, and often is, part of the spiritually reborn persons' future agenda.

This is my take on it, as someone who has had a lifelong interest in various schools of metaphysical/spiritual thought and discipline. I imagine that there are some Christians here who understand and can explain this noumenon much better than I can.

[NeoConsSuck]

21. Ask Michael Vick

The people of Philadelphia seem to like him.

[marions ghost]

22. I have to say No.

It is possible to change your behavior so that you can appear to atone for your sins, when really all you are doing is disassociating from the Self that did the bad deeds. Who knows whether a criminal REALLY feels guilt and is redeemed?--only God, if you believe in one.

I don't believe it is possible for sociopaths to be cured, so I doubt they truly atone for their sins and all that good stuff. They can become more functional but will always remain a threat to society. About all you can hope for is neutralization of the negative impulses. The lack of empathy and no ability to feel remorse --does not correct IMO.

On the other hand, those who can see these guys as sick and ultimately "forgive" are probably better off, for their own sanity.

To mass murderers--better luck in the next lifetime is all I can say. May you meet those you harmed beyond the final curtain. That's the only place where there's enough time to seek forgiveness directly.

[undeterred]

30. There is such a thing as forgiveness

but it is a process and it takes a very long time and involves two parties.

Redemption?

I think it is possible for a person who has committed heinous acts to redeem himself in some ways, if he has the conscience to begin with.

[grasswire]

31. the New Testament doctrine is "grace"

Grace is *unmerited favor*. It began with the biblical teaching that "while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." That is the concept in a nutshell.

And so a Christian may expect to be forgiven his sins. Supposedly the death of Jesus paid the price.

That's what they taught us in Sunday school, anyhoo.

[defacto7]

33. I'll vote for redemption under the following conditions:

1. He brings the dead back to life
2. He erases from their minds the pain
3. He restores all the lost limbs and scars to their original condition
4. He removes all the painful thought created in these peoples minds
5. He heals all the fearful and painful thoughts that the public has suffered
6. He convinces those who have been given impetus to commit similar crimes to not do so
7. He restores negative reactions toward the Muslim community to their original condition
8. He restores negative reactions toward the Chechen community to their original condition
9. He returns all destroyed property to it's original condition
10. He pays back all losses by local, state and federal government in the investigation
11. He fully restores trust in humanity that has been disturbed by his actions.

Outside of that... he goes to prison for the rest of his life.

[Tx4obama]

72. +100 n/t

[cbdo2007]

37. We aren't the victims so it isn't up to us.

[MineralMan]

38. Redemption? I can't see how I could answer that.

How would someone redeem himself after killing people in a violent act that was deliberately designed to do just that.

One redeems something at a pawn shop by paying back what was loaned, plus interest. That's redemption.

How does someone repay killing and maiming people? As for the interest, I have little interest at all in such a thing. If a heinous act is voluntary, then there's no redemption possible, since the dead people are still dead and the maimed still maimed. Failing a resurrection of the dead or replacement of missing limbs, such acts cannot be redeemed.

Religion? I don't have any of that. If religion can restore the dead to life and heal missing limbs, then I'll listen to their talk of redemption.

Redemption means repayment. That is impossible in such cases. There is no possible repayment, so there is no redemption.

[haele]

40. I don't know - think about "child soldiers". Some of them get out of that situation and

seek redemption.

In reality, redemption is something that the perpetrator seeks by his or her own actions, it is not something that society or victims of the criminal can give.

The surviving Tsarniev might be forgiven by some for being brainwashed or just being just young, stupid, aimless, and latching onto a radical philosophy when he was looking for something meaningful in his life - but that doesn't give him redemption.

Only his actions from now on for the rest of his life could give him redemption - his ability to atone for and go past what he had done in his pride and stupidity to try to make some good.
If he can't do that, then he is just like most other criminal - spending most of his life trying to take the easy way out of paying for mistakes he made.


Haele

[REP]

50. No amount of good works could ever undo such mindless cruelty

It is possible that, at some point, he could truly repent; could truly be regretful, remorseful and ashamed; that he could use his time to alleviate suffering (and yes, the prison system needs much needless suffering alleviated) but given the magnitude of utterly senseless violence inflicted on so many that so many will have to live with all their lives, whether that be missing limbs or missing loved ones, no act of contrition will ever, or can ever, truly be enough for redemption. And if he ever truly understands what he has done, he will understand that, too.

[quakerboy]

51. What type of redemption?

Spiritual? Legal? Moral? Personal? Societal? Physical?

[liberalmuse]

55. Anything is possible.

It's probably not likely, though. Maybe if he made restitution somehow, by doing something for the public good, and the victims of his crimes were willing to forgive him.

We'll have to watch next season of "Homeland" to find out, I guess.

[hughee99]

56. To get redemption from whom?

I think society, or at least certain groups may consider such a person redeemed, but I don't think someone who's truly sorry for their crimes will ever feel they've done enough to redeem themselves.

[Douglas Carpenter]

57. Bill Ayers became a professor in the College of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago,

and a national leading figure as an American elementary education theorist. According to Sarah Palin he palled around with Barack Obama. In his case he unlike that of the younger Tsarnaev boy - he was a very serious political leader and thinker and an equally serious bomber. The right-wing attempted to use his causal acquaintanceship with Barack Obama to cause political damage - but with little success. So some people care more than 40 years later, but clearly most people have forgotten about it.

I suppose that in time - like multiple decades - enough of the public may have forgotten about this Boston Marathon and it might be possible for a much older Tsarnaev to find a place in this world. But it will not be easy

[Tx4obama]

73. Bill Ayers did not kill or physically hurt anyone. n/t

[Douglas Carpenter]

75. setting off bombs multiple times certainly could have

[Tx4obama]

94. But...

In an op-ed piece in 2008, Ayers gave this assessment of his actions:

The Weather Underground crossed lines of legality, of propriety and perhaps even of common sense. Our effectiveness can be — and still is being — debated.[40]

He also reiterated his rebuttal to the charge of terrorism:

The Weather Underground went on to take responsibility for placing several small bombs in empty offices.... We did carry out symbolic acts of extreme vandalism directed at monuments to war and racism, and the attacks on property, never on people, were meant to respect human life and convey outrage and determination to end the Vietnam war.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_ayers

[KittyWampus]

58. Yes. Of course.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

59. I think those responsible should bear full responsibility for their actions

They may come to a point of genuine repentance but they still have their obligations.

I could envision a scene in which the surviving bomber confesses a religious epiphany in the future but then graciously accepts the continuation of his sentence. If this were the case I would pray his penance is genuine and hope to see him redeemed in the eyes of God. If I didn't then I would be setting myself as the final arbiter of Right and Wrong. I cannot say, "Well, I'm no terrorist bomber!" in the hopes that his "greater" sins somehow grant license to my own. I would be a moral monster if I said such a thing as if I could do whatever I pleased so long as I didn't do *that* thing. That would be self-exalting and that is the key to all evil. Therefore, I will pray that he seeks the same Grace I pray is available to me.

[mythology]

60. I'm not a christian, but I do believe in redemption

I think that forgiveness has to come from both the offender and the victim, but I think redemption is based on the perpetrator of a wrong realizing that they have erred and working to not do the same in the future.

Obviously the still living alleged perpetrator in Boston can't bring back the dead, or give limbs back to those who lost them and can't make that right. But he can learn to live his life in a way that gives back under whatever his upcoming circumstances. He's probably not going to be put in general population in prison, but he can at least not try to fight the guards, to in whatever way be a "model" prisoner. He can take the time to learn that while he may have had reason to be angry at the U.S., there were better ways to express that than through violence.

I get the holding a grudge thing. I haven't talked to my dad in nearly 14 years. But I think it would be possible for him to get redemption for treating me the way he did if he learned and grew from it, even if I will never speak to him again. Which is why I think that forgiveness and redemption have to be considered as separate ideas.

[MrSlayer]

61. Good deeds? Doing your cellmate's laundry?

No, there really isn't anything you can do to make up for blowing up children. Not from a jail cell and not from the grave, where he'll most likely be.

[Recursion]

62. As a Universalist, I would say it's not only possible but it will happen

That's a minority position among Christians, though.

[yawnmaster]

64. Good deeds alone, not enough, but it would require true repentance...

The good deeds are evidence of the repentance, but the person must be truly repentant for redemption to be possible.

re·pent 1 (r-pnt)
v. re·pent·ed, re·pent·ing, re·pents
v.intr.
1. To feel remorse, contrition, or self-reproach for what one has done or failed to do; be contrite.
2. To feel such regret for past conduct as to change one's mind regarding it:

[cliffordu]

66. Sure: Become an organ donor and then kill yourself.

(NOT talking about you)

[In_The_Wind]

87. Maybe

[etherealtruth]

67. Redemption is always possible

I am not sure it is always possible framed in religion .... but (in my mind) it is always possible to create far more "good" than harm if one is committed to doing so.

[alcibiades_mystery]

68. I'll bet everyone on this thread tears up when Red meets Andy Dufresne on the beach

Red, of course, murdered a man in his youth. Nobody here who watched The Shawshank Redemption (it's Red's redemption, not Andy's, as Andy was innocent!) thought the thoughts that they're expressing on this thread.

Is it just that we love it in fiction? I don't think so.

In the film, we see the unfolding of man's growth, his development and bond with others. In short, we see the concrete becoming of a life. In the abstract, we all utter the ugly sentiments expressed on this thread. In the concrete, it gets more difficult. Next time you have a thought against redemption, apply it to Red from The Shawshank Redemption and see if your thought holds. They should have never paroled that old man at all, right?

[davidpdx]

83. Get busy living, or get busy dying

That is one of my all time favorite movies. I didn't see it until many years after it was released and have seen it so many times.

[marions ghost]

84. Ugly?

the sentiments expressed here are not ugly for the most part, just realistic. What they did was ugly.

We all hope that there's a Hollywood ending somewhere (for killers and for us mere sinners). But the reality is that there usually isn't.

To say that there is no redemption possible in this lifetime for these guys does not mean they should be killed for it or even that they should not be "forgiven." It just means that if you can do what they did, you don't have the mental and emotional capacity to achieve such a lofty, wishful, and abstract goal. The best you can hope for is disassociation from the self that did the deeds and not commit more crimes.

I'm not coming at this from a religious angle & don't claim to know what happens to them on any kind of ultimate judgement day. Only talking about the prospects in this life.

[alcibiades_mystery]

86. That's your opinion

I respect it, even if I disagree.

I think humans have a remarkable capacity for becoming, for change. It's not lofty or abstract; it's concrete: we see it every day. I think the idea that "if you do X, you have Y mental and emotional capacities" is indeed a religious notion. It's the old concepts of fate and essence dressed up in pseudo-science. It's as metaphysical and abstract as one can get. Some people change; some people don't. But transformation is always possible. I don't go in for fate.

[marions ghost]

90. I'm talking about biology

and early development. There are some people who are so defective mentally and emotionally (assuming you consider the inclination to annihilate others a defective mental construct)-- that they cannot be transformed. There is no capacity to be transformed. I don't think these people should be treated with the cruelty they inflicted on others, but it is far-fetched to hope for their turning around and dealing with what they have done in the same way that you or I would. Most of them kill themselves or have a fatalistic death wish. They hate others, they hate themselves, they hate life. Even if they live, they have no urge to atone--they don't really want our "redemption"--we can take it and shove it.

These criminals can be rehabbed to become functional and exhibit more appropriate behaviors. But you can't train a person to feel remorse, no matter how much lip service you give to it. Not saying all killers are this way--many do feel regret and can transform. But those who coldly plan & carry out massacres and bombings of innocents--these will not be in that category. Nothing to do with fate. To do with the reality of the truly sociopathic.

This article gets to the pathology of it:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/assessment/2004/04/the_depressive_and_the_psychopath.html

[alcibiades_mystery]

91. I understand that people who hold that view like to think it is scientifically grounded

Indeed, I addressed this in the previous post: "It's the old concepts of fate and essence dressed up in pseudo-science." We're not likely to agree, even after a long discussion of the scientific merits (or lack thereof) of some of these arguments, so I'll wish you good day.

[marions ghost]

92. I honestly don't understand what your beliefs are grounded in

...other than Hollywood endings.

If you care to explain, I'm listening. You have a belief. I have a belief, which I explained. You offer no reasoning behind your belief and blow me off. But if you care to elaborate why or how you believe the Tsarnaev brothers or the Columbine killers could ever be redeemed, please do.
Can we even think of an example where this has happened? And how do you know for sure?

I won't argue back along any scientific lines. Would like to hear what your rationale is. It's interesting to me that anyone can even think that. Where does it come from? If it's religious, don't worry I don't ridicule religions. I'm not interested in arguing. Just asking out of curiosity at this point. Not interested in a long debate with someone who won't budge. Just, why?

[4 t 4]

74. NO- NEVER!!! nt

[JI7]

77. in a case like the Boston Bombing i think it would depend on the Victims

especially the family of those who died.

[LostOne4Ever]

78. Its always possible

It is always possible for someone to redeem themselves.

But a part of that is taking responsibility for their actions and accepting their punishment for their transgressions.

[JVS]

82. Is it possible to get redemption at all?

[davidpdx]

85. I think it is possible, depending on the severity of the crime and what actions the person takes

to redeem themselves. The guy who is accused on the bombings in Boston I would say no. There are cases where I think one can.

I have known people who have done bad things early in their lives, paid the consequences, and gone on to redeem themselves. Things that I think matter is whether the person has acknowledged what they have done and tried to make amends, in what ways have they tried to improve themselves (treatment, schooling, etc.) and how committed are they to promise themselves and society that they will never do it again.

[TheKentuckian]

88. I think so, I also believe in the possibility of rehabilitation.

[panader0]

89. "Redemption Song" by Bob Marley

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=QrY9eHkXTa4

[Cleita]

93. I think Uncle Ruslan got it right. He needs to beg for forgiveness from

his victims. Then he needs to pay for his crimes both in prison time and good deeds. Only his God can give him redemption.