![[small-web-version_harperfree_poster.jpg]](https://1.bp.blogspot.com/_WGczmWu7Wwc/SdCJyy2LN1I/AAAAAAAABWE/ABYCkbJaKaQ/s1600/small-web-version_harperfree_poster.jpg)
Yep, here’s where Canada’s Conservative party could one day be headed. With the subtle but urgent march of the likes of Woodworth, Kenney, and the 91 MP’s who voted against women’s rights, how much longer before we are urged to debate the right of women to vote? Or, listen to a recommendation that the death penalty be enforced for “rebellious children?”
“The maintenance of civil order in society rests on the foundation of family discipline. Therefore, a child who disrespects his parents must be permanently removed from society in a way that gives an example to all other children of the importance of respect for parents. The death penalty for rebellious children is not something to be taken lightly. The guidelines for administering the death penalty to rebellious children are given in Deut 21:18-21:”
Not to fret though. The author of that frightening bit of wishful biblical prolicide, Arkansas Republican candidate Charlie Fuqua, doesn’t really think parents should put to death their misbehavin’ kids. He just thinks of the death penalty as a convenient ‘deterrent’. (Emphasis mine.)
Fuqua helpfully notes that “This passage does not give parents blanket authority to kill their children.” Rather, parents would have to “follow the proper procedure in order to have the death penalty executed against their children.” Fuqua assures the reader that, in his view, the procedure would “rarely be used.”The threat of death would, however, “be a tremendous incentive for children to give proper respect to their parents.’
Reassuring, no? But think of such a hellish biblical thought in the heads of Harper or Woodworth or any of the 91. Not so reassuring. There is nothing as disturbing to a Conservative than children with minds of their own.
X-posted at Let Freedom Rain
Fuqua assures the reader that, in his view, the procedure would “rarely be used.”The threat of death would, however, “be a tremendous incentive for children to give proper respect to their parents”
This is scary stuff. I’ve long felt that one of the larger threats to law and order was the selective enforcement of so many laws. Laws are on the books that haven’t been enforced in decades, but could always be used by some opportunistic politician.
Discrimination in enforcement is a problem as well, like the difference between how upper class use of cocaine is dealt with compared to lower class, other race use of crack. Essentially the same drug, prosecuted very differently by CLASS.
Too bad there is no death penalty for being stoooooooooopid, there would go the base of the HarperCon PsuedoConservative Party!