PARSOL responds to Comm. v. Butler decision

Viewing 6 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #70883 Reply
      Avatar
      admin

      By PARSOL . . . Although we at PARSOL are disappointed in the results of the PA Supreme Court’s decision in Commonwealth v. Butler, which was a 7-0 un
      [See the full post at: PARSOL responds to Comm. v. Butler decision]

    • #70891 Reply
      Avatar
      Tim in WI

      I’m thinking there are 4 more registry cases still pending in SC of PA. The deal with SVP designation is that it comes with process protection, by jury of peers and not by the administration alone.

    • #71038 Reply
      Avatar
      Douglas Martinez

      I have no clue what this case is about nor what a SVP is. I have tried finding this case but I am constnatly being asked to pay money. I tried finding it on the PA Supreme Court Website but could not find it. Can you possibly let me know where I can find this case?

    • #71040 Reply
      Avatar
      JJJJ

      The whole notion of calling <i>anyone</i> a “predator” is spine chilling to me. It is a dehumanizing term. For that reason, it reeks of systematic human – rights abuse. Dehumanizing people is the first step that the Nazis took. Dehumanization is the first step whenever someone wants to abuse and degrade and humiliate (and systematically destroy). Besides, this term is simply disingenuous, and it is altogether vicious to use it towards a fellow human.

      As a matter of cultural anthropology and psychology <b>every</b> human being is a predator when it comes to matters of the heart. There is oral sex, of course and all of its descriptive language. And the acts of kissing, licking and nibbling that every human engages in when in the throws of sexual intercourse. Even non-sexual adoration seems “predatory” at times. For instance, a grandmother might say to her grandchild, “you’re so cute, I could just eat you up!” And we call beautiful people “cutie-pies” (a pie is eaten – yes, even gobbled, at times.)

      The word “<i>Predator</i>” is extremely insulting (in general) to any civilization of humans. Those who use it, do so ignorantly and with mob-mentality.

      At <b>That</b> is the antithesis of human progress!

    • #71042 Reply
      Avatar
      Perry

      I have been designated as an SVP, by Westmoreland County. They did so, only because of my previous record of convictions-three others-and in all of them, I’ve never used Weapons or Intimidation against any of the People I’d previously Victimized. The first opportunity I get, I hope to relocate to another State, where I will have at the very least a real fighting chance, to have this Label eradicated from my life. Is it likely to happen in the Near Future? Most likely not. However; I must try, and try again repeatedly. I must believe, at some point in the next five or six years, and opportunity will present itself for this to be taken up again.
      I pray, that I won’t be in The ‘Common-Hell’, of Pennsylvania when that happens. You see, it’s ALWAYS, going to be about Money for Them,-The Legislators and Supreme Court Judges- and The Media anyway. We know it. So do They!!

    • #71065 Reply
      Avatar
      The Criminalized Man

      It’s not just arbitrary and dehumanizing, it’s prejudicial. Is this the 1920’s? Do we really have to fight against state-mandated prejudice again, in the name of equal rights?

    • #71154 Reply
      Avatar
      Dan B

      Dehumanizing is the whole point! You can do all sorts of evil things to something that’s less than a real person – in fact, a sub-human can be treated worse than an animal. That’s why slaves weren’t considered full human beings. That’s why we had nicknames for races we were fighting in wars.

      Think about the attitudes here in America. A person addicted to alcohol that’s been in jail or prison six times and ran over someone while drunk is a man with a disease, whose recovery we celebrate. A person that got caught looking at child pornography (sometimes even if he thought it was an 18-year-old) is a “monster” that doesn’t deserve to live.

Viewing 6 reply threads
Reply To: PARSOL responds to Comm. v. Butler decision
We welcome a lively discussion with all view points provided that they stay on topic - keeping in mind...

  • *You must be 18 or older to comment.
  • *You must check the "I am not a robot" box and follow the recaptcha instructions.
  • *Your submission must be approved by a NARSOL moderator.
  • *Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • *Comments arguing about political or religious preferences will be deleted.
  • *Excessively long replies will be rejected, without explanation.
  • *Be polite and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • *Do not post in ALL CAPS.
  • *Stay on topic.
  • *Do not post contact information for yourself or another person.
  • *Please enter a name that does not contain links to other websites.

  • *DO NOT POST LINKS TO OTHER WEBSITES
Your information:





<a href="" title="" rel="" target=""> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <pre class=""> <em> <strong> <del datetime="" cite=""> <ins datetime="" cite=""> <ul> <ol start=""> <li> <img src="" border="" alt="" height="" width="">