The New York Daily News reports that Joe Paterno did indeed know about Jerry Sandusky molesting a young boy in the shower and, according to emails from 2001, apparently talked his superiors into not reporting it to the police and handling it internally instead.
Newly uncovered emails in the Jerry Sandusky case show that Penn State officials were on the verge of blowing the whistle on him — but changed their minds after talking to coach Joe Paterno.
The missives, obtained by CNN, seemingly contradict the late Paterno’s claim that he alerted higher-ups to a report of Sandusky showering with a boy and had nothing to do with the matter after that…
The emails were sent in 2001, two weeks after assistant coach Mike McQueary found Sandusky and a boy in a shower – and three years after another shower incident.
They reveal that Penn State administrators planned to alert Sandusky’s Second Mile charity and the state Department of Public Welfare, but dropped that idea after consulting with Paterno.
“After giving it more thought and talking it over with Joe yesterday, I am uncomfortable with what we agreed were the next steps,” Curley wrote to Schultz and Spanier.
The officials even acknowledged in the emails that not raising the red flag about Sandusky’s conduct could land them in hot water “down the road.”
But Curley expressed support for getting “professional help” for the defensive coordinator.
“I would be more comfortable meeting with the person and tell them about the information we received and tell them we are aware of the first situation,” he reportedly wrote.
Spanier said he was “supportive” of that approach, according to CNN.
“The only downside for us is if the message isn’t heard and acted upon and we then become vulnerable for not having reported it,” he wrote presciently.
Ya think? It’s the same problem that the Catholic Church has long had, refusing to report molestation to the police. And just like in all those cases, the pedophile was therefore allowed to continue to victimize more kids.
87 comments
Skip to comment form ↓
slc1
July 4, 2012 at 11:40 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
There is a certain parallel between Joe Paterno an J. Edgar Hoover in that the reputations of both of them were flushed down the toilet after their deaths.
John Pieret
July 4, 2012 at 12:02 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Curley expressed support for getting “professional help” for the defensive coordinator
Well, if they had actually done that and insisted that he cooperate, it might (big caveat) have provided them some cover. As it is, that “if the message isn’t heard and acted upon and we then become vulnerable for not having reported it” will be pretty damning. Penn State might soon be a private university belonging to Sandusky’s victims.
grumpyoldfart
July 4, 2012 at 12:05 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
My prediction: No action will be taken against those involved in the cover-up.
Marcus Ranum
July 4, 2012 at 12:07 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
There is a certain parallel between Joe Paterno an J. Edgar Hoover in that the reputations of both of them were flushed down the toilet after their deaths.
Yeah, it’s as if the force of their personalities kept everyone from telling the truth about them until they were safely inhumed. In the case of Hoover, it was doubtless fear. In the case of Paterno it was – what? Everyone wanted to be part of the legend? What legend, now?
reverendrodney
July 4, 2012 at 12:16 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
That so little was done about Sandusky molesting children makes me wonder if others in the Penn State organization, are guilty of the same thing, and thought it was no big deal. Ho hum.
It reminds me of the joke about three men rowing a lifeboat away from a sinking ship. One man says: “Wait, what about the children?” Another man says: “Fuck the children.” And the 3rd man says: “I did.”
Paterno got what he deserved, which is that he lived long enough to see his legacy destroyed. Too bad J. Edgar wasn’t outed before his death.
Reginald Selkirk
July 4, 2012 at 12:19 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Say it ain’t so, Joe.
slc1
July 4, 2012 at 12:25 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re reverendrodney @ #5
It was known as far back as the Roosevelt Administration that Hoover was gay. There is a story told that Roosevelt was informed about Hoover’s orientation and his reply was something to the effect that he didn’t care what Hoover did on his own time, he was only concerned how he carried out his duties while on the job.
tricycle
July 4, 2012 at 12:41 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I’d normally be agreeing with grumpyoldfart. However, I think the wind has shifted on these types of criminals and the people whose silence and discretion supported the ongoing predation. I hope I’m right. I hope the lawyers in the civil suits are unrelenting in their discovery and are merciless in their choices of people who they expose.
otrame
July 4, 2012 at 12:53 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Outed for what? Being gay? That is not what was wrong with J. Edgar, you know. He was a gay man who was a tyrant, who hurt innocent people and failed to stop bad people because of his need to dominate his little kingdom, and to a lesser extent because of his fear of communism. The only thing about him being gay that had anything to do with it was whatever actions he took that hurt other people because of his fear of being outed.
reverendrodney
July 4, 2012 at 1:29 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Otrame:
I didn’t know that J. Edgar was gay until reading it at slc1 (above). I meant too bad he wasn’t outed as a blackmailer.
left0ver1under
July 4, 2012 at 1:46 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
grumpyoldfart #3:
Or just as likely, McQueary will be made the fall guy.
It’s easy to blame it on the person with the least power, to ask “Why didn’t HE call the police?” and suggest that it was his fault it never stopped.
tommykey
July 4, 2012 at 2:04 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I hope those students who rioted at Penn State when Paterno was fired are feeling a little ashamed of themselves now.
Trebuchet
July 4, 2012 at 2:11 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I think what’s new here is not that “Paterno knew”, it’s that he was an active participant and instigator in the coverup. Just like the Pope.
Who Knows?
July 4, 2012 at 2:22 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
This crime is too infamous for there to be no action taken. Especially with this damning evidence that they indeed knew what they were dealing with in Sandusky. They decided to sweep it under the rug and because of this even more people were victimized.
It is unfortunate that Joe Paterno isn’t alive today to witness the destruction of his character and Penn State.
cptdoom
July 4, 2012 at 2:56 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Given that two Penn State officials are under indictment, I don’t think there’s much chance in this being swept under the rug again. Penn State has also expressed a desire to make quick financial settlements with the victims, which I would normally consider a positive outcome, unless it means the criminal investigation is hampered. Perhaps it would be better for the plaintiffs’ lawyers to insist on discovery and depositions before agreeing to any settlement. That way the prosecutors could have access to the civil suits’ evidence.
Michael Heath
July 4, 2012 at 2:58 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
reverendrodney writes:
First I don’t think Joe Paterno’s legacy was effectively destroyed by the time of his death. And even if it was, that is not anywhere near sufficient suffering relative to what he deserves; especially given the subsequent suffering of children after he knew about Mr. Sandusky.
interrobang
July 4, 2012 at 3:33 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
There is a certain parallel between Joe Paterno an J. Edgar Hoover in that the reputations of both of them were flushed down the toilet after their deaths.
I don’t know enough about Hoover to comment, but nobody flushed Paterno’s reputation down the toilet; he pulled the handle himself.
Zeno
July 4, 2012 at 3:33 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
That’s okay. I’m sure Paterno is still eligible for canonization by the Catholic Church.
slc1
July 4, 2012 at 3:35 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re reverendrodney @ #10
Actually, Hoover was blackmailed at least once. The FBI was investigating a Congressman named Cornelius Gallagher from New Jersey. It is alleged that the congressman communicated a threat to a friend of Hoovers, Roy Cohn (of McCarthy infame), that, if Hoover didn’t lay off, Gallagher would go on the House floor every day during the time allocated for speeches and and out Hoover as a homosexual. Apparently, Hoover did lay off.
It should be noted that several years later, after Hoover died, that Gallagher was caught up in the ABSCAM scandal and ended up doing a stretch in the slammer.
Crip Dyke, MQ, Right Reverend Feminist FuckToy of Death & Her Handmaiden
July 4, 2012 at 3:37 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
suffering that doesn’t lead to positive change is pointless, and I don’t wish it on anyone.
I earlier said -when someone wished that medical science wouldn’t advance fast enough to keep Sandusky alive until parole was a possibility – that I wished the opposite. That I didn’t think that X years (10, maybe?) would be long enough to feel the suffering of his victims. But then I said that I’d be happy to parole him if he really got it, if he really could feel what he put his victims through and made a true change in his character and behavior.
I don’t mind suffering as part of reformation. In fact, I think suffering is inevitable if a person wants to change from a Sandusky to something more respectful of human beings. Unless and until a person feels the impact of their crimes on others, there simply isn’t the motivation to make a true change. The only change that imposed suffering motivates is a change in methods to reduce the chance of getting caught.
We’ll never know if Paterno felt the suffering of his victims, but he certainly didn’t live long enough to transform his character and behavior. There’s no good that comes of wishing he suffered more unless we wish that it’s suffering that leads to transformation.
Here’s hoping that every abuser will feel the suffering of their victims and choose to stop making more.
Stevarious
July 4, 2012 at 3:48 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
But he had to know it would be. I don’t see how, as far as it got before his death, he couldn’t know that the rest would come out eventually.
slc1
July 4, 2012 at 4:22 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re #20
I am afraid that I can’t agree with the commenter at #20. As far as I am concerned, child rapists should be burned at the stake. And no, I am not a victim.
Who Knows?
July 4, 2012 at 4:43 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Suffering? I have no idea whether Joe Paterno would suffer or not. Or whether or not his “suffering” would be transformative. There is the chance that he would only feel self pity for what has happened to him.
In any case, it still would be better if Joe Paterno would have had to listen to the testimony of the people that Sandusky did inflict life long suffering on. That he would see the effect his decision had on both his “legacy” and the college he coached for. As it is, it is a burden to be shouldered by his family and Penn State.
otrame
July 4, 2012 at 6:25 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@22
Yeah, well I am a surviver of child sex abuse. And although I feel my rapist should have spent the last of his years in jail (he didn’t–long story I don’t want to get in to), I would never want him burned at the stake. I wouldn’t want anyone burned at the stake. That is because I am a decent human being.
Sandusky needs to never see a free day again as long as he lives. May he live long.
And no, I don’t want him raped either.
As for Paterno, he wan’t a stupid man. I think he knew what was coming. Maybe he stopped taking his meds. I think I would have if I were him, though I honestly can’t imaging doing such a thing. I really can’t.
I do wonder if he felt bad about what he did. Did he feel bad about the children raped after the incident he knew about or only about what the world finding out did to his “legacy” and to Penn State?
The football program should be suspended for at least a year, with heavy penalties–like not allowed in playoffs, no matter how good they do–for another 5 years. They did this to “protect” the program. Lets make sure people know that in the long run it seriously damaged the program.
Also anyone who can be shown to have known about it needs to go to jail for a while. Everyone, no matter how fucking rich they are. (I know. Dream on, right?)
slc1
July 4, 2012 at 6:29 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re otrame @ #24
I’m sorry Mr. ortame, I have no sympathy or compassion for child rapists. If it were up to me, Sandusky and all those pedophile priests would be burned at the stake.
otrame
July 4, 2012 at 6:53 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I never said I had sympathy. It has nothing to do with sympathy. It has, as I said, to do with being a decent human being. I have no sympathy for them. I want them in jail, miserable, for a really long time. But burning them to death? No. I am not cruel enough. No one should be cruel enough to do that. And cruelty is all it is.
And it’s Ms. Otrame.
Dr X
July 4, 2012 at 7:01 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
People often don’t report because of potential consequences to the abuser that flow back to the reporter and the reporter’s family/social network. Burning at the stake would probably multiply failure to report genuine abuse by levels dwarfing today’s problem with failure to report. IMO, it’s far too much of a burden to place on reporters.
And while failure to report genuine abuse is a problem, false allegations of child abuse are especially common as a form of vengeance and in a variety cases that come before family courts, eg. keep the ex-in-laws away from the kids by accusing grandpa of sexually abusing the children. People can’t be unburned at the stake once they’ve been burned.
Hank Fox
July 4, 2012 at 7:12 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Otrame, I agree with you. I’m opposed to the death penalty only partly for what it does to the ones executed, but MAINLY I’m against it for what it does to US.
No matter what the crime, there are certain things you just can’t allow yourself to do. Not without severe negative side effects. Yes, you’re supposed to be angry about these things, and maybe fantasize what you might do. No, you can’t do what you imagine doing, because it will hurt YOU.
Closely related, I sometimes read about PTSD and the various treatments, etc., and I think there shouldn’t be any NEED for treatment. We should take the hint that war screws up most of the young people forced into it. Those who aren’t wrecked by it, THOSE are the ones we should be studying and treating.
conway
July 4, 2012 at 7:31 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Paterno was worshipped second only to the Pope among Catholic men. It should come as no shock that he covered for child rapists.
otrame
July 4, 2012 at 7:36 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@ Hank Fox
I am reminded of a friend who said, “If it was your kid who was raped and murdered, you would be in favor of the death penalty.”
No, I wouldn’t. Not ever. For a wide variety of reasons, from the fact that rich men don’t get the death penalty to the fact our courts, even when everyone is trying to be honest, sometimes convict the wrong person, to the fact that KILLING A HUMAN BEING IS WRONG unless you are in immediate fear of your life and/or bodily integrity. I believe the state must have the same rules as the individual in these matters.
None of my reasons are from any sympathy for the killers/rapists.
As for PTSD, as the mother of a young man who came back from 2 tours in Iraq with some issues, I think what you mean that the one’s who aren’t affected already had serious problem, and yes to that. To the ones who are affected, for some it is mild, for some serious, but all need help working around the damage so they can get on with their lives.
Marcus Ranum
July 4, 2012 at 10:08 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
slc1 writes:
I am afraid that I can’t agree with the commenter at #20. As far as I am concerned, child rapists should be burned at the stake.
“Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And when you look into the abyss, the abyss also looks into you.” (Nietzsche was right about that much, at least)
Marcus Ranum
July 4, 2012 at 10:13 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
(Of course we should not be surprised that slc1 favors burning at the stake for child rapists. He also favors a couple of multi-megaton bombs dropped on Iran as a negotating strategy. I’m guessing that if we were to dig far enough we’d find that he favors some kind of horrible death for anyone who isn’t more or less him or subservient to his beliefs. Fortunately for us all, slc1 is just a powerless, cowardly blog-denizen, who emits his vile judgement on others from the safety of the anonymous interwebs. Otherwise, he’d be a monster that makes child rapists seem benificent in comparison.)
Marcus Ranum
July 4, 2012 at 10:17 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
I do wonder if he felt bad about what he did. Did he feel bad about the children raped after the incident he knew about or only about what the world finding out did to his “legacy” and to Penn State?
Of course he didn’t feel bad. Or he wouldn’t have done it – especially since he had plenty of time to re-assess the situation and blow the whistle. What he felt bad about was the chance that his legacy would be tarnished. That’s a heck of a trade, huh? The certain knowledge of a child’s assault against, “maybe it’ll all blow over.”
slc1
July 4, 2012 at 10:39 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re Marcus Ranum @ #32
Mr. Ranum, the pederast lover.
kraut
July 5, 2012 at 12:44 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Fortunately for us all, slc1 is just a powerless, cowardly blog-denizen, who emits his vile judgement on others from the safety of the anonymous interwebs. Otherwise, he’d be a monster that makes child rapists seem benificent in comparison.)
Not a coward, just your run of the mill arsehole.
Regurgitating the typical nonsense any teaparty member would spout.
Nothing to see here, move on..
matty1
July 5, 2012 at 5:22 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Ms Otrame,
I want to say how much I admire your moral integrity, to stick to your belief that certain punishments are wrong even when it would be understandable to wish every kind of harm to your abuser shows a strength I admire hugely.
Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven
July 5, 2012 at 5:29 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
You don’t have to. Have some sympathy for the people who’d have to pile up the wood, strike the match, and watch.
Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven
July 5, 2012 at 5:32 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
…wait, you’ve endorsed genocide before…
Um, just take our word for it that doing this would fuck people up, I guess.
isilzhaveni
July 5, 2012 at 6:38 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@#34 Slc1–
It’s easy to react viscerally and want immediate and harsh retribution for people who are guilty of heinous acts. However, it takes a better, more rational person to understand that a justice system based on torture and murder, even of those who are the worst of humans, is not something that any enlightened person should want to advocate for, much less actually create.
Who would really want to live in such a society that can create and run such system and call it “justice”? What kind of people would we need to run such a system? And once we’re put such people in such a position of power and authority do you really think they’d have any compunction to NOT abuse their position? Can you not understand why so many people reasonable fear such a system that you are so devotedly advocating? Even if those in power weren’t monsters to begin with, no one could carry out such heinous acts like burning people at the stake an remain untouched and unaffected by those actions.
What about the innocent who are wrongly convicted? Do they deserve such torture? Are you so blinded by your hubris that you fail to see the state of our current justice system? Have never heard of the Innocence Project and seen how many people have been wrongly convicted? Even worse, for many of them they were not just mistakenly convicted in a system striving for the truth, but often obvious evidence of their innocence was completely ignored by the authorities who only want to convict SOMEONE for the crime.
Also, calling people “pederast lovers” for not supporting your nasty idea of “justice” demonstrates just how badly reasoned your entire concept actually is.
ischemgeek
July 5, 2012 at 6:43 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@slc1
I’m against all capital punishment. Type 2 errors are too common in the justice system, and every innocent killed is state-sanctioned murder. I don’t want to have my hands dirtied because I vote in a government that puts together a system that results in the deaths of innocent people.
Igorning my issue with capital punishment in general, there’s the issue of burning being cruel and unusual. It’s death by torture. If you punish a bad act by acting as bad if not worse than the person who’s being punished, what kind of a message are you sending? Killing is wrong, so I’ll kill you? Rape is wrong, so I’ll burn you to death? That’s messed up.
Finally, I too am a victim of childhood sexual abuse. I wouldn’t want those who abused me killed by torture. Locked up so they won’t hurt anyone else, yes. Killed by torture? Hell no. Do not use what happened to me and people like me to try to justify your sadistic fantasies. Do not co-opt me and my experiences like that. Do not try to pretend that you have the best interests of kids like I was at heart when you advocate death by torture being a legitimate part of the justice system.
KG
July 5, 2012 at 6:43 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Crip Dyke@20,
Excellently put.
Since slc1 has repeatedly called for a thermonuclear onslaught on Iran, which would of course condemn millions of children to hideous agonies, we can be absolutely certain it is not compassion for the victims of child rapists that motivates this desire to have those rapists burned at the stake. Slc1′s relish for advocating mass murder and torture becomes creepier every time I see it expressed.
Katherine Lorraine, Chaton de la Mort
July 5, 2012 at 7:27 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Not only is the death penalty bad, but burning is one of the WORST kinds of deaths you can have. It’s unbelievably cruel. You don’t stop hurting until your nerves have burned away, but before that it’s endless pain. I barely touched the edge of a hot pan last night and it hurt, I can’t imagine a scorching fire across my entire body. It removes the dignity of the person, it is nothing but heinousness and vileness.
isilzhaveni
July 5, 2012 at 7:35 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@42 Katherine–
And for anyone to propose such a thing as a system of “justice” makes them heinous and vile!
slc1
July 5, 2012 at 8:08 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re #42
I’m sorry Ms. Lorraine, child rapists have no dignity. They are, IMHO, lower then contract killers.
Re #37
Of course, it’s easy to sit here and indulge oneself in fantasies. However, I would like to think that my hand would not tremble at stacking up the lumber and striking the match.
By the way, it should be noted that child rapists in prison are considered sub-human. Your run of the mill bank robber, mugger, and even murderer considers it a personnel insult to be locked up with scum like that. That’s why they have to be kept separated from the rest of the prison population, else they wouldn’t last a week.
slc1
July 5, 2012 at 8:09 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Just to make it perfectly clear so that there be no misunderstanding, child rapists are not even people.
ischemgeek
July 5, 2012 at 8:37 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@slc1: So, if you consider someone subhuman, it’s okay to torture them to death? Do you even realize how completely messed up you sound?
slc1
July 5, 2012 at 8:48 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re ischemgeek @ #46
Well, I guess that former Secretary of State George Schultz is also messed up as he once referred to homicide bombers as not even people.
isilzhaveni
July 5, 2012 at 8:54 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@45 slc1–
Seems you found my previous post tl;dr.
You’re a disgusting human being. Please, get some education before spouting your vile nonsense in public. Here’s your first protip–start by reading about the Kern County satanic/ritualistic child sex abuse hysteria from the 80s. Next, start reading up on the Innocence Project to begin understanding just how flawed our current system already is.
I think people like you are *almost* as immoral, vile and disgusting as child rapists.
beezlebubby
July 5, 2012 at 8:56 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
To bring this thread back on topic, I would like to mention that there is a much wider net of enablers that go beyond Paterno, and even beyond Penn State, all the way to the NCAA itself. There is evidence that numerous higher-ups in the NCAA had knowledge of Sandusky’s misdeeds, and also took no action. The fact that Sandusky was never able to get a coaching job anywhere else in the country provides a clue that there was widespread informal knowledge that Sandusky was a molester.
I’m all for the metaphorical burning of Paterno’s reputation at the stake of public opinion, though! As long as Sandusky never breathes a breath of fresh air again for the rest of his life that would be fine. It doesn’t do much for the victims, but it’s the only tool we have.
d cwilson
July 5, 2012 at 8:57 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Two former Penn State officials have already been indicted for their role in the cover-up and former president Spanier is still under investigation. It’s likely he’ll be facing indictment, too. We’ll see how it plays out, but the scandal has gotten too big for any high-ranking officials involved to escape with just a slap on the wrist.
d cwilson
July 5, 2012 at 9:03 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
slc1:
Yes, he is.
Ironically, convincing someone that the intended targets of a bombing attack aren’t even people is one of the first steps in recruiting them to become a suicide bomber. So, do you see where that line of thinking leads?
slc1
July 5, 2012 at 9:04 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re isilzhaveni
An even worse scandal was the McMartin pre-school brouhaha in Los Angeles which was the result of the pseudo-scientific recovered memories theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial
joe_k
July 5, 2012 at 9:07 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@slc1: ‘child rapists are not even people’.
Hmm, why does that argument sound familiar? Really, you think that dehumanising people gives you an excuse to commit the most horrible tortures?
HOW IS THIS JUSTICE? It’s simply revenge fantasies for no good cause…
d cwilson
July 5, 2012 at 9:14 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Ramen.
As a Penn State alum, I don’t have the words to express the pain and disappointment his actions make me feel. Paterno had ample opportunities in his lifetime to retire with his sterling reputation intact. If he hadn’t advocated for the cover-up, he could have been the guy who put the welfare of children first. Penn State would have easily weathered that scandal had they brought the authorities in the moment McQueary reported what he had seen.
Paterno could have issued a statement back in 2001 how deeply shocked and saddened he was when he found out about Sandusky’s actions and people would have loved him for it. Some people just never learn that cover-ups always make the initial scandal worse once the truth inevitably comes out.
Instead, he opted for short-term thinking and then lived just long enough to see his precious reputation turn to ash. Maybe there is some justice in this world after all.
Marcus Ranum
July 5, 2012 at 9:19 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
slc1 writes:
By the way, it should be noted that child rapists in prison are considered sub-human. Your run of the mill bank robber, mugger, and even murderer considers it a personnel insult to be locked up with scum like that.
Your “run of the mill bank robber” does, apparently, have a more fully-formed moral sense than slc1.
dingojack
July 5, 2012 at 9:19 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
SLC – I think the word you grappling for is ‘untermenschen’.
You know who else had a problem with them…?
Dingo
Katherine Lorraine, Chaton de la Mort
July 5, 2012 at 9:23 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@slc1:
I should’ve said dehumanizing in addition to removing dignity, since it does both. The prior because it wipes away all recognition of a human figure, the latter because while you’re being burned, you first lose your clothing since it burns faster.
But even non-humans deserve better. I would never torture anything, not even an ant. My humanity allows me to view all things as undeserving of a punishment that is so vile and atrocious. It has nothing to do with justice and everything to do with seeing the target of your punishment writhe in agony.
To think anyone worthy of such a death is vile, it’s an atrocity, and it’s simply disgusting.
slc1
July 5, 2012 at 9:39 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re Marcus Ranum @ #55
The fact is that child rapists are in grave danger of being assassinated if they are placed in the general prison population (Jeffery Dahmer anyone). That’s why they are placed in isolation. And the reason is that the other prisoners consider them to be sub-human and unworthy of existence and consider it an insult to be incarcerated with them.
matty1
July 5, 2012 at 9:42 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Spot the difference.
Child Rapist -”I don’t care what anyone else thinks or feels about my victims or what I do to them so long as I’m satisfied”
SLC1 -”I don’t care what anyone else thinks or feels about cruel and unusual punishment so long as I’m satisfied”
otrame
July 5, 2012 at 9:45 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Slc1 has plenty of time to be vile all over Ed’s blog because PZ finally booted him. Reminds me of what happens living in an apartment building when one resident calls in the exterminators–the roaches go to another apartment.
kraut
July 5, 2012 at 10:02 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
“By the way, it should be noted that child rapists in prison are considered sub-human.”
Nice to know where you take your moral compass from.
It fits your self portrait.
BTW – what about the army of a country that invades another country without cause and kills >100 000 civilians and is as an occupying force unable to actually exert any control to protect civilians from civil war after having destroyed political and physical infrastructure?
I guess following your logic the US army should be incinerated.
kraut
July 5, 2012 at 10:12 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Slc1 responses remind me beside the untermenschen references
connecting his ideas to that of another vile political movement of the fact that often those most strenuously recommending harsh measures against “teh gay” were to a large extend themselves closet homosexuals.
isilzhaveni
July 5, 2012 at 10:13 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@12 Tommykey–
I’d love for a reporter to track down some of the students and interview them now.
slc1
July 5, 2012 at 10:20 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re otrame @ #60
Slc1 has plenty of time to be vile all over Ed’s blog because PZ finally booted him
Actually, for the information of Ms. otrame, I seldom commented at PZ’s blog, mainly because comments there get lost amongst the, often, hundreds of talkbacks.
Howsoever, just for the edification of Ms. otrame, I was given the heave ho at PZ’s blog because I had the temerity to point out that the feud he was having with Abbie Smith was all too reminiscent of a similar feud he had several years ago with our host here and another feud he had before that with Chris Mooney. Apparently, Prof. Myers has tender corns and doesn’t like to be reminded of his previous feuds, which is his privilege.
ischemgeek
July 5, 2012 at 10:29 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@slc1
Yes, yes he is. Anyone who refers to another human being as not a person is messed up. Full stop. Someone I find to be a depraved and sadistic monster of a person is still a person, regardless of how deplorable I find their actions and viewpoints. And I would afford them all the rights of a person regardless of how much I loathe them and everything they stand for, because to do any less is to make myself everything I despise.
I value living in a society where every person is considered fully human. If you can’t understand the humanistic view of it, maybe enlightened self-interest will shed some light on it for you: Consider that people are wrongly convicted through no fault of their own sometimes. If the punishment is inprisonment, you can, to an extent, undo it and provide compensation when the mistake comes to light. If the punishment is death, on the other hand… You can’t undo death. Think of it this way: What if you happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and so are wrongly accused of a heinous crime? And what if, through prosecutorial misconduct, exonerating evidence is hidden for a decade or more? Would you rather you be facing death-by-fire or would you rather be facing the rest of your life locked up if you’re wrongly convicted?
dingojack
July 5, 2012 at 10:34 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Kraut (#62) – Uh, that wasn’t SLC (to be fair) – see mine.
Unlike him, I wouldn’t have him burned alive for something he did not do.
Dingo
slc1
July 5, 2012 at 10:35 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re kraut @ #60
I guess following your logic the US army should be incinerated.
No, I think that George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, Richard Pearle, Donald Rumsfeld et al should be made to answer for their crimes. The victorious allies didn’t put the ordinary soldiers of the Wehrmacht on trial after WW 2 and I don’t think that ordinary soldiers in the US Army should be put on trial.
Re kraut @ #62
So Mr. kraut is now claiming that I might be a closeted, would be, child molester. Fucke him and the horse he rode in on.
By the way, the notion that gay bashers are by and large closeted homosexuals has no evidence to support it. Certainly, some of them are, e.g. George Reckers, Roy Cohn, J. Edgar Hoover, and Ted Haggard (although Haggard was rather bland compared to most born again gay bashers), but most of them are just run of the mill bigots, not unlike the anti-Semites and anti black bigots.
dingojack
July 5, 2012 at 10:37 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
SLC – perhaps you’re more into bestiality then? :D
Dingo
Katherine Lorraine, Chaton de la Mort
July 5, 2012 at 10:45 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
@slc1:
(OT: Can you quit with the “Mr.” “Ms.” thing for Pete’s sake. Use the nym if it’s not clear. Kraut could just as well be a woman as they could be a man. It’s disrespectful and sexist to assume that a person is a man rather than a woman if they’ve got a neutral-gendered nym. It happens all the time in online discussions.)
gingerbaker
July 5, 2012 at 11:00 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
All this sanctimonious vituperation against slc1 seems to me to be based upon an indefensible premise – that human life is precious, as otrame said:
Seems to me there is a pretty solid argument to be made that human life is the opposite of precious.
We Americans spend multiples of tens of trillions of dollars to maintain a military whose only real purpose and history is to kill humans, whether they be active participants or mere collateral damage. We argue for the right to abortion, which we would not allow if we *truly* felt that human life was precious. Billions of humans have died, and billions more will die and all (to a nearest approximation) without leaving nary a ripple in the tide of human affairs to follow.
We are insects.
slc1
July 5, 2012 at 11:08 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Well, it appears that my burning at the stake suggestion has been rejected by the other talkbackers. Fair enough. How about just putting child rapists like Jerry Sandusky in with the general population?
dingojack
July 5, 2012 at 11:18 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
SLC – here’s a weird and wacky idea – let’s do neither. gingerbaker – in what way is a clump of cells and autonomous human being? If they are a autonomous human being why do they have the right to live parasitically off another autonomous human being? Pease give specific details and examples.
Dingo
slc1
July 5, 2012 at 11:22 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re gingerbaker @ #70
Well, I would like to think that at least some portion of the defense budget is spent on, ta da defense! The real problem is that the US Military has been put in the position of playing policeman to the rest of the world.
For most of our history, up to WW 1, we stayed out of European wars. It has been argued that Wilson make a major error in entering WW 1 on the side of the Triple Entente. The argument is that, had he stayed out and presented his Fourteen Points Plan backed up by a threat to intervene against the side that rejected it, he might have played the role of arbiter and forced a compromise peace. A compromise peace, which avoided massive reparations by the Germans, might have prevented WW 2.
I think that the only answer here is for the US to stop playing the role of the world’s policeman. I say this while the neo-cons are beating the war drums for intervening in Syria and whose influence in the Romney campaign was pointed out in an earlier post on this blog.
kermit.
July 5, 2012 at 11:58 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
slc1 -
I’ll refrain from saying more other than I agree with the others.
However, you did bring up one interesting point when you referenced the pseudoscience of recovered memories.
You may have seen mentioned in the news that Sandusky’s adopted son says that he had also been molested when he was growing up in Sandusky’s household.
Red Flag alert!
http://tinyurl.com/7zlgl65
“Jerry Sandusky’s son Matt recalled showering with his future adoptive father as a boy and pretending to be asleep to avoid being touched — memories that surfaced only recently…”
and
“Matt Sandusky said that he was undergoing therapy and that his memories of abuse were only now surfacing”
This of course does not mean that Sandusky was innocent of the crimes he is already convicted for.
logic
July 5, 2012 at 12:02 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
As others have noted, this story highlights the possibility that the problems of the Catholic Church are not specific to it, but to predominantly male (“good old boy”) cultures. Certainly that doesn’t mean that every predominantly male organization will cover up sex / child abuse scandals, but a higher percentage of predominantly male organizations will do so compared to mixed-sex or predominantly female organizations.
Weight that against the baseline probability of having a child abuser in your organization (the vast majority are male), and this is what you get. Virtually all child abuse cover up scandals happen in predominantly male organizations.
gingerbaker
July 5, 2012 at 12:05 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
dingojack asked:
It’s not, but essentially the difference is some unit of time. And then it depends on how impatient you are. To a geologist, for example, nine months is an instant, easily within a standard deviation, completely negligible. The time factor would seem to be a subjective rating.
How precious we hold human life would also seem to be subjective. Imagine a sci-fi story where the last living woman has just been impregnated. That “clump of cells” would be precious indeed, and arguments to justify its abortion because it was not an “autonomous human being” would not be appreciated very much. The conclusion that we really do not hold human life (absolutely) precious seems justified.
How precious, then, do we hold human life? We just wiped out at least 500,000 Iraqi men, women, and children as evidently acceptable collateral damage in a war based on lies. No charges have been brought against the instigators, and no legitimate calls for the elimination of our military have been heard. So, the conclusion that not only do we not hold human life to be precious, but that we don’t hold it very precious at all seems justified.
I don’t see how anyone can make a non hypocritical argument that abortion should be outlawed because human life is precious. The same goes for capital punishment, I guess. Talk to me about the abolition of the death penalty after we dissolve our miltary and end abortion and I will be all ears.
logic
July 5, 2012 at 12:13 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Also, my previous comment begs the question of why men are more likely to cover up a scandal. We know that men show stronger group identity. They are easier to recruit into cults and gangs, for example. In the “social free market”, they form and join gangs at much higher rates than women. So it could be that men are more likely to cover up a scandal that sullies the reputation of the group when the offense is committed against an “outsider”.
ruteekatreya
July 5, 2012 at 12:26 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
When it gets past that unit of time, it’s typically considered an autonomous human being, so this is correct.
I find this unlikely, because AFAIK geologists, like historians, are capable of disengaging their work mode’s time scale from that of human life that is being lived now. Good try to justify conflating humans and fetuses though.
Yes, making laws based on science fiction is totally a sound strategy.
Yeah, that conflation was totally cool with you, I know.
Also, I like how this line of logic neatly permits you to ignore any effort of ‘improvement’ (Scare quotes because seriously now, abortion’s just fine and dandy.), by pointing to the other 2. That’s quite a good excuse to never do or support anything.
gingerbaker
July 5, 2012 at 12:36 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
ruteekatreya, you are missing my point. I am not making an argument against abortion, I’m doing the opposite.
slc1
July 5, 2012 at 1:04 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Re kermit @ #74
Maybe that’s why the prosecutor didn’t put him on the stand to testify.
phrankeaufyl
July 5, 2012 at 1:23 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
There’s your problem right there.
dingojack
July 5, 2012 at 1:31 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Logic said: “We know that men show stronger group identity. They are easier to recruit into cults and gangs, for example. In the “social free market”, they form and join gangs at much higher rates than women”.
Do we? Is there a citation for this assertion? How was this determined? & etc.
Dingo
savagemutt
July 5, 2012 at 1:38 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
A group of male scientists in Copenhagen gathered together to research just this thing. They ended up getting in rumbles and tagging subway cars.
Who Knows?
July 5, 2012 at 3:50 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Gingerbaker has an excellent point. Even without the reference to abortion, there is plenty of evidence that we do not consider human life to be all that precious. We’re happy killing anyone. So don’t get side tracked on that issue.
Stevarious
July 5, 2012 at 5:46 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
No, the difference is a great deal of effort and sacrifice on the part of a woman. That this effort and sacrifice takes a great deal of time, and typically more or less the same amount of time, does not make time the critical factor here – just a necessary one.
A pile of bricks and lumber is not a house, and a clump of cells in a uterus is not a person. When you claim that the only difference is ‘time’ you trivialize the efforts of the actual person involved to the point of dehumanizing them. You may as well be calling her an Easy-bake oven.
Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven
July 5, 2012 at 8:13 pm (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Perhaps the word you want is “untermenschen?”
dingojack
July 6, 2012 at 11:04 am (UTC -4) Link to this comment
Azkyroth – SNAP!
:) Dingo