![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
First of all, let me say what many of you already know - I'm not a parent, and am never likely to be one. Unless, of course, you count our furry adoptees, but I suspect that is a vastly different kettle of fish. For one thing, I know for a fact that I could never adore a human child the same way I do my beloved pooch. For another, non-human animals are innocent in a way that humans never can be.
Which brings me to the substance of my post. I have just been reading the following article in the Daily Mail - which some have dubbed the "Daily Fail" (and if this article is any indication, that's a fair moniker).
You can find the article at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1149282/I-dont-blame-Janette-Mercer-lying-protect-murderer-son-Id-says-CAROL-SARLER.html
Now, I can understand the desire to defend and protect. I have it, when it comes to my darling husband and to our furry family, and also to the rest of my human family. However, I accept the fact that my parents and I will never agree on some things - religion springs to mind as a big dividing gulf. Nor will my brother and I agree in this regard. Those are the things we choose not to discuss amongst ourselves, because we know it will only end in bitterness and angry lashing out. But I understand where my parents and my brother are coming from, because I used to be a devout Catholic.
However, I also know that my parents and my brother are people of the highest honour and moral standing. They are also - religion aside - extremely caring and compassionate. The major reason I try to stand up for them is I know, regardless of anything else they may be, they are good people. They would never, knowingly nor through neglect, hurt another creature if it could possibly be avoided.
However, my desire to defend and protect only goes so far. I will not voluntarily associate with anyone who deliberately inflicts unjust harm upon another. I cannot see how the mother in the above article could possibly justify her actions. At what point could she have convinced herself that the 11-year-old deserved to die? She may have seen it as protecting her own, but at what cost? And if she really had any understanding of the situation, surely she could have understood that making her son pay for his crime was the best thing for him, too. What's almost worse is that the writer of the above-mentioned article seems to have such a backward view of women - that we exist for the sole purpose of bearing, raising and protecting offspring, even if said offspring are monsters.
If motherhood is something that would make me blind to the basic principles of natural justice, I have two words - fuck that.
Which brings me to the substance of my post. I have just been reading the following article in the Daily Mail - which some have dubbed the "Daily Fail" (and if this article is any indication, that's a fair moniker).
You can find the article at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1149282/I-dont-blame-Janette-Mercer-lying-protect-murderer-son-Id-says-CAROL-SARLER.html
Now, I can understand the desire to defend and protect. I have it, when it comes to my darling husband and to our furry family, and also to the rest of my human family. However, I accept the fact that my parents and I will never agree on some things - religion springs to mind as a big dividing gulf. Nor will my brother and I agree in this regard. Those are the things we choose not to discuss amongst ourselves, because we know it will only end in bitterness and angry lashing out. But I understand where my parents and my brother are coming from, because I used to be a devout Catholic.
However, I also know that my parents and my brother are people of the highest honour and moral standing. They are also - religion aside - extremely caring and compassionate. The major reason I try to stand up for them is I know, regardless of anything else they may be, they are good people. They would never, knowingly nor through neglect, hurt another creature if it could possibly be avoided.
However, my desire to defend and protect only goes so far. I will not voluntarily associate with anyone who deliberately inflicts unjust harm upon another. I cannot see how the mother in the above article could possibly justify her actions. At what point could she have convinced herself that the 11-year-old deserved to die? She may have seen it as protecting her own, but at what cost? And if she really had any understanding of the situation, surely she could have understood that making her son pay for his crime was the best thing for him, too. What's almost worse is that the writer of the above-mentioned article seems to have such a backward view of women - that we exist for the sole purpose of bearing, raising and protecting offspring, even if said offspring are monsters.
If motherhood is something that would make me blind to the basic principles of natural justice, I have two words - fuck that.
