Fanfare for the Uncommon Woman
Borrowing from the genius and talents of the remarkable Aaron Copland, the idea of creating a fanfare for us as women strikes my senses.
Since I am heading for jury duty tomorrow (with the hopes of not getting selected), it seemed that I could spend the time, while waiting, writing.
What makes you an uncommon woman and how would you define your uniqueness with a fanfare?
Edited: While at jury duty today, I started thinking about some of my own views about the legal system and how they have changed over the years. Do you feel that life imprisionment can be more harsh than an individual receiving the death penalty?
Thank you for your minds.
Since I am heading for jury duty tomorrow (with the hopes of not getting selected), it seemed that I could spend the time, while waiting, writing.
What makes you an uncommon woman and how would you define your uniqueness with a fanfare?
Edited: While at jury duty today, I started thinking about some of my own views about the legal system and how they have changed over the years. Do you feel that life imprisionment can be more harsh than an individual receiving the death penalty?
Thank you for your minds.
6 Comments:
Using the theme of this post to 'piggy back' on the post below, regarding what makes you an uncommon woman, I can say that the first quality that comes to mind is the fact that I like to think. To me, the brain is truly the greatest organ in the human body (contrary to what many men feel.) Being a woman who is interested in many subjects, is also something that makes me uncommon.
Seeing from the posts below, I am surrounded by provocative, thinking women who can master such subjects. Does that make us uncommon women or common, or does it make no difference?
I am scheduled to appear for jury duty so I am off for the day, but truly look forward to reading this blog when I return.
Thank you again for your minds.
Back from jury duty. Thankfully, I was not called to serve and the entire panel was dismissed at 3pm.
While at that court house, I came across someone, who was the presiding judge. We used to practice law together. It made me think about how we used to be when we began practicing...full of dreams and ideas of fairness and justice. As I steped away from his chambers, I started thinking about how some of my own ideas have changed over the years. It brought me around to the subject of the death penalty.
Do you think that a sentence of life imprisionment can be more severe than the death penalty? What are your views? Have they changed over the years, and if so how?
I'm very liberal when it comes to most topics but one I'm incredibly conservative about is the death penalty.
I should add that I am a native Texan where we don't sentence more people to death, California does that. But we are known to actually go through and execute those on death row. I also have to add that in Texas we don't have life imprisionment without the possibility of parole.
I was had to write a paper years ago regarding the pros and cons of the death penalty in Texas. It's often said that it costs more to execute a prisoner than for life imprisonment but that is because of all the cost behind appeals.
I think in an ideal society, jail would be enough of a deterrent to stop one from killing but it isn't.
I think we are going to have even more problems in the future as society becomes even more desensitized.
I believe that it's crucial for schools to now, more than ever to take a stand against violence because so many kids have parents who don't know what's going on in their lives. Take for instance the growing numbers of school shootings.
My feelings are incredibly mixed when it comes to those on death row who are mentally ill. I'd want some type of guarantee that they can't re-enter society after killing someone but I don't know the facts on that regarding the death row here.
As for those wrongful conviction and the death penalty, there is no doubt that more has to be done there. There was news a while back about this happening about a local man who was released.
A great movie on the death penalty is "The Life Of David Gale." It's a fantastic movie, no matter which side one agrees with.
Read Dead Man Walking by Sister Helen Prejean. There is no humanity, no justice, and no moral or legal rationale, for the state killing its citizens.
This isn't a liberal vs conservative issue. It's a moral issue. Until the state is perfect, it has no business being in the business of killing citizens.
Points, well stated, Atreau!
I think, like many problems in society, if there is some intervention at the inception, these issues can be dealt with in a more meaningful way. Education is clearly one of them.
Like you, I consider myself a person who believes in justice and equality for all. The courts have concluded that the death penalty is not is cruel and unusual punishment. The purpose of punishment is that it must act as a deterinent. That being said, I believe that in certain cases, death is warranted.
If we look at the economics behiind incerceration vs. death, perhaps, in the long run, death would be more sufficient. But economics, standing alone, is not the purpose of the death penalty.
My question goes to the effect death vs. life in prision would have not solely on on the person incarcerated, but on the society as well. These are two seperate questions, I believe.
Another provocative topic from our Woman On The Verge!
I have always been against the death penalty, and my reasoning is not based on the fact that it could be the cruelest and most unusual of punishments.
My Sicilian genetic makeup leads me to believe that a lifetime behind bars is more punishment than a state-ordered killing. To know that there is no hope for freedom for the rest of one's life would be more punishment for a crime than the death penalty, to me at least.
But I also wonder if I would feel the same way if God Forbid any of my loved ones were a victim of a crime.
I need to think more about this.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home