posted 03-23-2006 09:39 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elphaba is Alive:
Here is the passage from the book.

"Irji?" said the Witch, gripping her elbows.
"Now he had to die," said the Wizard apologetically. "He was the next in line to be Prince, wasn't he?"
"Tell me it was not brutal," said the Witch. "Oh, tell me so!"
"The Paraffin Necklace," admitted the Wizard. "Well, it was a public affair. A statement needed to be made.

---

posted 03-24-2006 07:12 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elphaba is Alive:
I think it was more gruesome than that. Just my personal feelings. I don't think hanging would have been enough of a spectacle, especially after the Wizard had just told Elphaba how Sarima and her sisters had died, "Perhaps some underling who had no authority in the matter had an appetite for a bloodbath. It's so hard to get reliable help in the armed forces."
I don't think "somone who had no authority" had anything to do with it...

Thats why I think lighting Irji's head on fire was just the spectacle the Wizard wanted.

---

posted 04-12-2006 09:21 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by bobber_63021:
I hate to say it, but I believe a paraffin necklace comes from a type of torture/execution. It's a tire (or similar ring) with fuel, place around the torso and ingnited. It burns the body in half. I heard of this from reading about executions in some third world countries.

---

posted 04-12-2006 09:43 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Elphaba's_Other_Lover:
yea however does it reall have to be that vulgar and violent? I mean ewwwwwwwwwwww. (Sorry I am kinda squimish)

---

posted 04-12-2006 10:41 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by jerseyminx:
public executions tend to be violent.. vulgar would be a matter of opinion.

---

posted 04-13-2006 12:04 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by jerseyminx:
public executions tend to be violent.. vulgar would be a matter of opinion.

---

I agree.

posted 04-14-2006 08:10 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Acey:
A society that condemns murder yet murders it's own citizens is nonsencial, contains the most fundamental falacy or organised barbarity and instantly condemns itself into history as an unjust, oppressive and evil nation.

---

You're talking about America, I assume?

"We can't kill Terri Schiavo."

"Let's kill people with the death penalty!"

"A mother can't kill an unborn baby to save her own life!"

"Let's cut medical benefits so that people who are fine but need medications can die now!"

I'm against execution, like I said. But I'm for abortion. I don't think people should make it necessary, but I think it should be an option. Does that make me totally hypocritical? Hope not. *shrug*

posted 04-14-2006 12:03 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by Acey:
A society that condemns murder yet murders it's own citizens is nonsencial, contains the most fundamental falacy or organised barbarity and instantly condemns itself into history as an unjust, oppressive and evil nation.

---

I love you.

posted 04-14-2006 01:26 PM               

So, we can kill our own kind, but we also can restrict who gets married?

Even the "eye for an eye" scripture doesn't condone murder. Because more so in the bible is forgiveness than anything else.

So, grgh, I don't feel like going into a long rant at the moment. Just... the government's reasoning is crap.

posted 04-15-2006 09:27 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Yero my hero:
I hate whenever the government tries to use the bible as an excuse for passing or not passing laws.

---

It also happens to be Unconstitutional (right?)--separation of church and state. But with the power of the fundamentalist Christians now, that's kind of fading....

quote:

---

Even the "eye for an eye" scripture doesn't condone murder. Because more so in the bible is forgiveness than anything else.

---

YES. Forgiveness. But they only have to use the Bible where it supports their cause or the point they're trying to make. It's quite a long book, and there are a zillion different versions. You'll find something that supports your opinion, no matter what it is, if you take the section out of context and just right.

quote:

---

the government's reasoning is crap.

---

Pretty much. And then they try to actually SAY it in a way that it sounds like it isn't...and it doesn't work. No joke.

posted 04-16-2006 02:47 AM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by Toto:
And don't ya think we should probably steer clear of the religious vibe, seeing how it has exploded in the past?

---

posted 04-16-2006 07:55 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by missnikkaphon:
YES. Forgiveness. But they only have to use the Bible where it supports their cause or the point they're trying to make. It's quite a long book, and there are a zillion different versions. You'll find something that supports your opinion, no matter what it is, if you take the section out of context and just right.

---

The bible also changes its own view in someways... Although I believe the change happens more when the old testament stops and the new begins.

As for the entire torture thing.. it's a tricky subject. I see two different arguments. What happens in a 'ticking bomb situation'? Can one person, a 'bad' person, be sacrificed to save more 'good' people? Some will definately say no, and others will say yes. There isn't a right answer, not even morally. Because if you say no to using any methods to obtain information that will save the larger group, then you condemn them to their fate, most likely death. Does that make you somewhat responsible? If it were your child or loved one, does that change your stance?
Torture for politcal reasons (ie: to send a message) is wrong. Plain and simple. Unfortunately for as long as their has been governments, there has been torture.

This has been a long speil (sp?) and I'm not sure if I make sense.. but I'm not trying to stir the pot or cause problems. Just bringing in some thoughts I picked up from a class I took this semester. (We read The Dewbreaker, which mentioned torture as it related to Haiti in the 60s.)

posted 04-19-2006 11:54 AM               

"A hospital patient died when he became engulfed in flames as he lit a cigarette after being treated with an inflammable gel for a skin complaint.

Philip Hoe, 60, is believed to have sneaked out of a ward and on to a fire escape stairwell to get around a smoking ban.

It is believed that as he lit the cigarette it ignited fumes from a paraffin and kerosene wax cream used on large areas of his body.

The gel is thought to have soaked into his nightclothes which burst into flames, causing him to scream in agony.

Staff at Doncaster Royal Infirmary used fire extinguishers to douse the flames and the victim was found to be suffering 70 per cent first degree burns.

Mr Hoe, from Harworth, near Doncaster, south Yorks, was transferred 25 miles for specialist treatment at Sheffield's Northern General Hospital, but died a short time later on Monday night.

Police are preparing a report for the coroner and inquiries are being conducted by hospital officials and the Health and Safety Executive.

Nigel Clifton, chief executive of Doncaster and Bassetlaw Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, said yesterday: "This is a most tragic event. Our hearts go out to his family."

Doncaster Royal Infirmary operates a ban which forbids patients, staff and visitors from smoking in the building or in main doorways. The policy was already due to be extended on May 31.

Assistant Divisional Officer Bob Wood, of South Yorkshire Fire Service, described what had happened as "an horrific and tragic accident".

He said: "The victim, obviously a smoker, had slipped away from a ward for a crafty fag and was in the enclosed stairwell of a fire escape when he lit up. Unfortunately because of the nature of the cream that had been used to treat his skin condition this ignited the fumes and he was engulfed in flames."

Mr Hoe was married. His family declined to comment last night."

I do have a question though. Some of your ideas about the paraffin necklace being a noose that they set on fire while he was hanging. Well...it they set it on fire, wouldn't the noose burn away...?

posted 04-19-2006 11:57 AM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by ElphabaOfOz:
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.

---

Ooooo!! EoO!! Nice quote!!

in my humble opinion....murderers should not be murdered (capital punishment) for thier crimes. i say, let them LIVE WITH IT! let them feel like crap for the rest of thier lives for what they did!!
of course i know, then there is the debate of psycho/sociopaths, who dont feel bad about it in the first place! and then we have to differentaite them from the people who feel bad.
but i say, keep them all alive, locked up in jail, and just let them live with it.

no mercy from me, eh?

posted 04-19-2006 12:01 PM            

quote:

---

Originally posted by ready2flywww:
He said: "The victim, obviously a smoker, had slipped away from a ward for a crafty fag and was in the enclosed stairwell of a fire escape when he lit up. Unfortunately because of the nature of the cream that had been used to treat his skin condition this ignited the fumes and he was engulfed in flames."

Mr Hoe was married. His family declined to comment last night."

I do have a question though. Some of your ideas about the paraffin necklace being a noose that they set on fire while he was hanging. Well...it they set it on fire, wouldn't the noose burn away...?

---

Not necessarily. Think about how a candle burns. The wick is a piece of string or rope usually. But it is soaked and coated in a wax that keeps it burning. So I'm guessing that if the noose is the method used, it has been treated to stay burning long enough to set the person to flames as well.

And I just have to say, I know that the british have much different terminology and this is really a sad article, I couldn't help but laugh at the term "crafty fag." I know "fag" means cigarette, but what on earth does it mean when a cigarette is "crafty"?! *muffles giggles*

posted 04-19-2006 12:04 PM               

quote:

---

Originally posted by PlantANote:
Not necessarily. Think about how a candle burns. The wick is a piece of string or rope usually. But it is soaked and coated in a wax that keeps it burning. So I'm guessing that if the noose is the method used, it has been treated to stay burning long enough to set the person to flames as well.

And I just have to say, I know that the british have much different terminology and this is really a sad article, I couldn't help but laugh at the term "crafty fag." I know "fag" means cigarette, but what on earth does it mean when a cigarette is "crafty"?! *muffles giggles*

[This message has been edited by PlantANote (edited 04-19-2006).]

---

oooooohhh...okay. I wasn't quite sure how the whole wax/rope/noose thing would work. But now I do ^_^