Should dying Manson murderer be released?

>Good to know someone spoke up because I get so tired of
>hearing these weak stretches of logic that ignore personal
>responsibility. The only reason any of this is a discussion
>is because of her pseudo celebrity status.

I guess you're talking about my post, but I don't think I stated or implied anything ignoring responsibility. I actually stated and believe that she is responsible for her heinous acts. I was only trying to look at it in another way. Sorry about that. Won't happen again.

And yes, of course we are only talking about this because of the notoriety of the Manson murders. As long as we're talking about weak stretches of logic, what's your point?
 
"Consequences" is the key word here. We all make and are later affected by our choices. She made hers.

We can still be a compassionate society and keep her in prison. No one is torturing her. She has access to medical care, visitors and certain comforts. The only thing she lacks is freedom, and that she gave up when she murdered an innocent human being.
 
>I guess you're talking about my post, but I don't think I
>stated or implied anything ignoring responsibility. I
>actually stated and believe that she is responsible for her
>heinous acts. I was only trying to look at it in another way.
> Sorry about that. Won't happen again.
>
>And yes, of course we are only talking about this because of
>the notoriety of the Manson murders. As long as we're talking
>about weak stretches of logic, what's your point?

Amy,

It's probably about my post too! Seriously it really doesn't matter what any of us thinks. In the end God or (Higher Power) will have the final say. Like you, I just threw out a different thought. It doesn't bother me. I believe she should pay for her crime like any other criminal. I just try not be judgmental or to have my reaction grounded in fear, hate or any other negative emotion. Those very emotions lead to more negative actions and thoughts.
 
>The b*tch is psyco and just because she is 60 and has brain
>cancer does not mean she can't get out and still hurt someone.
> She is still dangerous.

She also only has one leg. But you may be right that she is dangerous, at least in terms of her connections. Who knows? A point worth making is that Atkins is not in prison and won't be going back to prison. She's been in a hospital since March. So it's kind of pointless to argue about her remaining in jail.

What I find interesting is that Vincent Bugliosi, the lawyer who prosecuted her and said she deserved the death penalty, now supports her release. This is from the LA Times:

"Vincent Bugliosi, who prosecuted Atkins, said she deserved the death penalty in 1971. But the former prosecutor said he believed now that Atkins has sincerely renounced Manson and that her 37 years in prison, along with her illness, changed things.

"She has paid substantially, though not completely, for her horrendous crimes. Paying completely would mean imposing the death penalty," Bugliosi said. "But given that she has six months to live, and the loss of her leg, I don't have an objection to her being released."

I'm not saying I agree with him, just that like it or not, it is possible that there are some nuances here. Again, if the Tate family and the other victims' families want her to remain in custody at the hospital, I completely support that.

As for the whole mercy issue, I know that some of the people here who have rejected the notion of compassion and mercy are Christians. If I remember correctly, Jesus forgave his torturers while he was dying on the cross. I believe that he also showed and preached mercy and forgiveness for criminals. Just wanted to remind the Christians here that these virtues are a central part of your religion.
 
Amy - I'm very torn on this one. As a Christian, yes, of course forgiveness is important. However, even after forgiving someone, they are still to be held accountable for what they have done. God is a loving God, but read a little further and you'll also learn he knows a thing or two about punishing murderers etc... I think letting her live in prison with shelter, food, and a shirt on her back is way more than she deserved. That is compassion in my book. I really think the families of the victims should decide what they do with her though. If they are ok with her going home to her family, then that's what should be done. If she killed my sister or daughter though, I don't think I would be so compassionate - one leg or not.
 
<Jesus forgave his torturers while he was dying on the cross.>
Then perhaps Sharon Tate and the others can forgive her in the afterlife. In the meantime, she can continue to serve out her sentence.
 
No, the key word is "revenge" here.

I am just stunned by some of the rhetoric here!!! Yes, it was a heinous crime and yes, she absolutely deserved to go to prison, there is no question about it.

On the other hand, that was 37 years ago, she received life WITH the possibility of parole which is VERY much about paying her "debt to society" and then rehabilitation and integration into society. The question is, is she a thread to society?

I am just wondering if any of us would feel different if it was our daughter (or son) who through misjudgements at a young age started taking mind-altering drugs and fell under the spell of a murdering psychopath.

And to those of you you have proclaimed that she has received mercy because she wasn't put to death, it is a disgrace for a civilized society. It puts us right on the same level with countries like China, Iran and North Korea.

How can we claim that killing is wrong and then resort to government sanctioned and court imposed killing as a "punishment" This cycle of violence diminishes all of us and sends the wrong message, especially to our children.

I do not advocate forgiveness for violent people and then release to the streets. I know that there are people who should be separated in a humanely secured manner from the community for the protection of all.

Some of you need to re-examine you rhetoric, especially some who in the past were really adament about their Christian beliefs and following the teachings of Jesus.
 
I'm not a Christian, but I do believe in forgiveness and mercy. I agree with Liann. Forgiving does not mean "letting off the hook."

As I have mentioned on this forum before, a couple of years ago, two friends of mine and their two small daughters were brutally murdered in their home during a random robbery. That killing shook a lot of their friends, including DH and me, to our core. I was pretty ambivalent about whether the murderers should receive the death penalty (I won't even go into how differently you feel about something like that when it hits so close), the only thing I was absolutely positive of was that I never wanted them to have an opportunity to do that to anyone else or to experience the joy of freedom ever again. (The one who finally confessed to the murders received life for killing our friends and death for the murder of their children. The other guy really didn't participate in the murders, and was given life. )

Now, I can talk forgiveness, and as a concept, it's great. And I can truly admire someone who can forgive something like that. But, maybe I'm a horrible person, but I will not forgive those monsters, nor will I even try. I will, however, think of them as little as possible, and try to find some peace in the fact that I was very lucky to know the wonderful people who were their victims.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkfxAhzwlU8
 
TeTe, I remember another post where you spoke about your friends. I can't imagine what that was like to go through and I totally respect your feelings. That youtube video is a very beautiful tribute.
 
>In the meantime, she can continue to serve out her
>sentence.

Actually, that's being decided by Los Angeles County, and so far it looks like she may be released (the prison has OKed it).
 
Amy (pixiesis) said, "As for the whole mercy issue, I know that some of the people here who have rejected the notion of compassion and mercy are Christians. If I remember correctly, Jesus forgave his torturers while he was dying on the cross. I believe that he also showed and preached mercy and forgiveness for criminals. Just wanted to remind the Christians here that these virtues are a central part of your religion."


Could you please find me the verses where Jesus says that criminals should not experience any consequences for their crimes here on this earth? None are coming to my mind. The closest I can think of is the woman caught in adultery and in that case he was exposing the hypocrisy of her accusers in that particular case. Furthermore her crime was not one against the state.

I believe that if Susan Atkins has repented of her sin and has accepted Christ's sacrificial death on her behalf, she does indeed have the forgiveness that Christ offers and has a wonderful eternity to look forward to. I don't hate her and I don't joy in her suffering. I simply believe that she must submit to the earthly consequences of her crime and I don't see how that is at odds with my Christian faith.

Jesus does indeed offer forgiveness of sins and eternal life to repentant sinners, but I can't think of where He states that criminals don't have to be held accountable for their crimes on this earth.

Perhaps you could give me some specific chapters and verses to consider. I'm always open to what the Word of God has to say and to adjusting my positions accordingly.


Also, are you advocating that we show Susan Atkins mercy in particular or should we show all criminals mercy and have no consequences whatsoever for any crime? What is your criteria for mercy for criminals? I'm trying to understand your position.

Thanks
Maggie:)

BTW--Dh thinks she's paid enough and should be released...
 
<<<We can still be a compassionate society and keep her in prison. No one is torturing her. She has access to medical care, visitors and certain comforts. The only thing she lacks is freedom, and that she gave up when she murdered an innocent human being.>>>

She should stay in prison.
 
>Could you please find me the verses where Jesus says that
>criminals should not experience any consequences for their
>crimes here on this earth? None are coming to my mind.

I think you are over-simplifying and/or misunderstanding my position. I'm not even advocating that she be released. I'm just stating that I can see why this is a consideration. I'm not an expert on this case. And I'll repeat again, I support victims' families opinion above all others. I was struck that the prison OKed the release and that the prosecuting attorney did as well, which led me to think about it beyond my natural initial response of "no mercy".

To answer your question, I think there is a difference between "not suffering any consequences" and showing a small amount of mercy and compassion in some cases. I clearly did not state that Jesus says that criminals "should not experience any consequences for their crimes here on this earth". I don't think any rational or sane person would argue this, not I and certainly not Jesus. Perhaps she hasn't suffered the consequences enough, but I think it's safe to say that she is far from "not experiencing any consequences". She has been in jail for 37 years. She is dying a painful and slow death. If she has a conscience (I don't know if she does or not) then she has certainly suffered the consequences in terms of regret and remorse. Whether or not the punishment has been severe enough, it is clear that to an extent she has (rightly) been forced "to submit to the earthly consequences of her crime". The question is not whether she should be spared from all consequences but rather whether the consequences she has already suffered are sufficient. I don't claim to know this, but I'm willing to consider both sides.

I am not and don't claim to be an expert on Christianity. But I do believe that this verse shows that Jesus sought a more civilized route (i.e. mercy and compassion) than the "an eye for an eye" Code of Hammurabi which prevailed at the time:

"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' But I tell you, don't resist him who is evil; but whoever strikes you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also. If anyone sues you to take away your coat, let him have your cloak also. Whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him who asks you, and don't turn away him who desires to borrow from you."

Matthew 5:38-42
 
From http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/06/13/manson.atkins/

"I don't want to seem like a heartless creature, but in all my years, I never considered this could happen," Debra Tate, the actress' sister, told the Riverside Press-Enterprise.

"She showed no compassion. She told my sister as she slit her throat that she didn't (care) for her or her unborn baby," Tate added.
 
Thanks for clarifying your position. Dh is more in line with your take on things in this case.

I believe that the verse you cited is more in line with not seeking personal revenge or retaliation and does not really apply to the criminal justice system. But it's always a good verse to be reminded of.

Again, thank you for your gracious reply.

Maggie:)
 
Amy,
Speaking as a Christian I support our Churches prison ministry. I write and visit a handful of women that I've become very close to. One woman killed the woman her husband was cheating on her with. She was wanted by the law and after coming to Christ turned herself in. Even though she had a total change of heart and repented of her crime.

As far as the Bible, we are taught to obey the proper authorities and that they have the right and ability to give punishment. (one example, Romans 13:1-4) If we did the deed we get our consequences for it. It is for the safety and good of the people. The legal system is supposed to be a unconnected 3rd party. So it is not done in a sense of vengeance/revenge but of justice. Punishment is also a deterant to more crime.

And even Paul said “If I am an offender, or have committed anything worthy of death, I do not object to dying” (Acts 25:11). The point was he had done nothing but they had it in their power and authority to do so if he had truly done wrong.

Susan is being cared for medically. It is not as if she is left alone dying with no help. If the death penalty had been legal at the time she wouldn't even be here now. She should be thankful for that.

I agree that God may forgive her sins if she is truly saved and grant her eternal life (I genuinely hope so!) but it doesn't take away the consequences of her actions now. She murdered in cold blood with no mercy.

The verse you quoted is more about personal vengeance than justice. Don’t do evil just because someone did evil to you. They did the wrong thing. You do the right thing. This policy is not a lack of justice. It is a call not to take personal revenge in order to get justice. Leave justice and revenge to God. The Bible says that God uses government to bring a measure of justice to the world. Romans 13:1-4

If a neighbor wants to be very rude and unkind to me I should not just argue back and be as ugly as they are but be kind anyway.. but if my neighbor kills my child it is right and just to have the police arrest him. I may seek to forgive the murderer but the crime must be punished.

I believe compassion in this area should be granted on a case-by-case basis, and I can't understand how anyone can advocate for it here. These murders were very horrific and premeditated.
 
These murders were very horrific and
>premeditated.
>
>
As is imposing the death penalty through the government, it is horrific and it is premeditated. I don't advocate letting people get off without concequences but for the life of me I don't understand why people think it is okay that we take it upon ourselves to judge over someone elses life or death and justify it because because this person has commited a heinous crime.

People toss in quotes from the Bible to back up what they've already decided anyway. People want to not only practice vengeance or revenge but also have God agree with them. The same thing happened in this country in the slavery debates and in the debates over women's suffrage.

I think the Bible is very ambiguous about this. The Bible is often quoted on both sides, those who want to justify capital punishment and opponents of the death penalty. The Bible in my opinion is the greatest book ever written, we will find in it whatever we look for.

For those, however, who take scripture as a justification for capital punishment, I think they are cherrypicking, emphasizing these passages and conveniently ignoring other similar passages in which death is decreed for one who works on the sabbath, or for one who curses one's parent, or even for a rebellious teenager, a woman not obeying her husband and a multitude of other offenses.

Again, I am not saying to let everyone go scott free if they committed crimes, on the contrary, for some crimes, I say, lock them up and throw the key away. However, I am really stunned by some people continuing to claim that it is mercy that we don't put someone to death and instead let him/her live.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Our Newsletter

Get awesome content delivered straight to your inbox.

Top