So we all get to decide when the law is applicable and to whom? If we can each decide for ourselves what is right and wrong irrespective of the law, then what standard can be used in passing judgement? Instant death to anyone committing a crime involving a minor? Or is it okay as long as one's actions do not fall foul of the public hysteria generated by the media?
No we don't. But neither does anyone have the right to pass judgement on them or take the moral high ground either. It's rubbish. We all know they are undeserving of protection. Like I said, I'm not the one who wants to pass judgement on them or anyone who wants to harm them, but it's stupid to call other people who would like to mete out punishment to them as being no better than animals and the same as them. Nobody allowed a baby to die, except the paedo and the couple.
The word evil has inevitable religious connotations, I'm afraid. Without any god or other absolute, how can 'pure evil' be defined, other than through human law? Incidentally, I recall reading that the boyfriend was a Satanist, so to his way of thinking, in causing pain to a defenceless child he was probably doing a 'good' thing by carrying out his satanic majesty's pleasure. Not the best example of one being in their 'right mind', but then the majority of the country does have religious beliefs, all of which (by your apparent definition) could be considered not in their 'right mind'.
Even a satanist knows his actions are evil when they are evil. There's no perverse reverse thinking of good being bad and bad being good. If that was the case, they'd commit suicide and self harm to meet their maker.
Not even the right to a fair trial and punishment? Why should they have to face any consequences other than what the legal system deems necessary? Perhaps you recall the murder of Jamie Bulger? Should the killers of that unfortunate have also lost their human rights (despite themselves being children)?
Give them a fair trial. It won't be justice though. Those kids knew what they were doing. Our system allows a lot of miscarriages of justice to happen. Whatever happened with those kids now? Have they grown up to commit more crimes or what? We protected them, as we'll protect the paedo and the couple now.
I'm saying that it's not fair that some people have human rights, but none of us have the right to take them away either, and the law is not fit to deal with it either. It's just injustice and instead of actually explaining to people that carrying out stupid acts of violence to these three will be unjust as well, most of the people wish to just tar them with the same brush and put the on the same level as the three who allowed the baby to die. I dislike people looking down their noses at anyone who is swayed heavily by their emotions and calling them animals. Whatever happened to putting your point across properly? If they're good people, they'll realise their actions are wrong and they'd back down and allow the law to carry out. If they don't obey the law then they are not stooping to the killers level, they're committing a crime in certain circumstances for which they are punishable, but what has anyone done except look down their noses at them? It's the same issue with kids, no one wants to tell them right from wrong, they justwant to tar them with a brush that calls them all feral creatures. What's the point in being smug on your own moral high ground when even you (no not you mic, I know from your post history you understand what you believe) just want to look down on others rather than educate them further on why it's wrong to prevent it happening. Looking down your noses and tarring everyone who wants justice to prevail (in a form that does not meet the law) just makes it look like you're taking the couples side and it's infuriating. Anyone committing the crime would be doing it as a crime of passion but it's not unpreventable.
HOW is it personal to you more so than anyone else?
It's just as personal to everyone else who wants to take the time and see it from both sides. The only people who seem to be looking stupid to me here is the ignorant folks who want to break the law and teach the three a lesson, but I can see where they're coming from and I'd have valid reasons against anyone I'd meet to convince them otherwise; and then there's the other people who just sit on their asses accusing people who haven't broken the law or done anything to prevent the the deaths and saying their just as accountable and it's our own doing by our greed and social ills when it's clearly not.
In retrospect I have worded my argument in the first post wrong. I gave off the idea that I'd like them to be mauled by the public. As much as I'd like it, I do not want it to happen, but the couple must accept responsibility which all the folks who look down their noses at decent folk who are just misguided in their actions seem to want to negate any responsibility the three should take for their own actions.