Mother puts baby in dryer.

[silenus]

Link. (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,177914,00.html)

Words fail me. I generally don't favor the death penalty, but sometimes people make me want to reconsider my position.

[Kalhoun]

Link. (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,177914,00.html)

Words fail me. I generally don't favor the death penalty, but sometimes people make me want to reconsider my position.
And you don't think there might be just a hint of mental illness going on here? Just a wee tad?

[tdn]

The first thing that pops into my head is to wonder why someone would do that. I would call this an act of evil if I could get beyond "Huh?"

[SentientMeat]

Postnatal depression is a debilitating condition. In around 1 in 1000 new mothers, extreme psychosis can result endangering both the mother, her children and the people around her.

Civilisation does not execute the insane. Killing your own child is almost the definition of "insane": I genuinely struggle to believe that this person of sound mind coldly and deliberately put their 3 month old in a drier and called the police.

[silenus]

Oh, she's definately insane. The knee-jerk reaction is "make sure she never breeds again, and get her out of society forever." But....a dryer? That's just sick.

[SentientMeat]

Oh, she's definately insane. The knee-jerk reaction is "make sure she never breeds again, and get her out of society forever." But....a dryer? That's just sick.Well, if her actions are the result of postnatal psychosis, then preventing her breeding will effectively be an instance of eugenics against the temporarily mentally ill. And, yes, it is just sick by definition.

[BobLibDem]

There are some actions so horrific that they simply cannot be done by a person that is mentally competent. This seems to be one of them. That she is or was insane is quite certain, so she needs to be treated and isolated from society unless and until she is cured.

[PunditLisa]

Aw, poor little guy. :(

Mom's a nut, no doubt. Though the head trauma would have been sufficient to kill the child by itself, I must confess I had no idea that a clothes dryer got hot enough to inflict third degree burns.

[tdn]

I must confess I had no idea that a clothes dryer got hot enough to inflict third degree burns.
Yeah, I would think that blunt force trauma due to the tumbling would be far worse. But then again, I've burned myself on zippers before.

I sure hope this woman gets the help she needs. And I hope that she never gets pregnant again. What a horror show.

[Rushgeekgirl]

Aw, poor little guy. :(

Mom's a nut, no doubt. Though the head trauma would have been sufficient to kill the child by itself, I must confess I had no idea that a clothes dryer got hot enough to inflict third degree burns.

Infant skin is much more delicate. My first daughter got scalded by water that didn't even seem that hot to me. I imagine dryers get much hotter.

Has the news said anything about her having postpartum psychosis? Is it possible that she could just be one mean bitch who couldn't control her temper that deserves to be punished?
I am completely against the death penalty, but just because she did this to her child does it mean she's mentally ill?

Not arguing with anyone here; I just don't have all the facts.

[Scissorjack]

There are some actions so horrific that they simply cannot be done by a person that is mentally competent. This seems to be one of them. That she is or was insane is quite certain, so she needs to be treated and isolated from society unless and until she is cured.

The problem with that line of reasoning is that some crimes must then be so horrific that the commision of them automatically qualifies the perpetrator as insane: the more horrific the crime, the greater the degree of exculpation.

[missbunny]

Why do so many here think she must be insane or otherwise mentally ill? Lots of sane people do horrific things to their children. Maybe she's just a sadistic fuck.

There's nothing in the link to indicate that she has any kind of mental problems, is there?

[Kalhoun]

Why do so many here think she must be insane or otherwise mentally ill? Lots of sane people do horrific things to their children. Maybe she's just a sadistic fuck.

There's nothing in the link to indicate that she has any kind of mental problems, is there?
It's a given, under these circumstances. Temporary or pre-existing, the woman was out of her mind to do what she did. I bet they automatically perform psychological testing on her before they try her, and I bet they determine she's nuts.

[Scumpup]

Sterilize the bitch right now. This very second. Whether she is sick or evil or both, she must be prevented from ever having another child. It is hard for me to come up with any good reason why a person who does something like this should be permitted to live. We put down rabid dogs because they are sick and dangerous, even if they were beloved pets.

[missbunny]

It's a given, under these circumstances. Temporary or pre-existing, the woman was out of her mind to do what she did. I bet they automatically perform psychological testing on her before they try her, and I bet they determine she's nuts.

Hmmm. I don't see it that way. Maybe she is insane but just the fact that she killed her kid in a horrible way doesn't automatically mean she must be insane to me.

[Lissa]

It's a given, under these circumstances. Temporary or pre-existing, the woman was out of her mind to do what she did. I bet they automatically perform psychological testing on her before they try her, and I bet they determine she's nuts.

That's a dangerous assumption.

[fushj00mang]

I sure hope this woman gets the help she needs. And I hope that she never gets pregnant again. What a horror show.

If she's guilty, the help she needs comes in a pair of 50cc syringes. First one, phenobaratol. Second one, potassium-saline. Or it could come at the end of a rope, or in an airtight room with potassium cyanide gas.

Then again, this is Louisiana...

[ParentalAdvisory]

Why do so many here think she must be insane or otherwise mentally ill?

Did your mother ever put you in the dryer after a bath to dry you off? :dubious:

[Hamlet]

Why do so many here think she must be insane or otherwise mentally ill? Lots of sane people do horrific things to their children. Maybe she's just a sadistic fuck.

There's nothing in the link to indicate that she has any kind of mental problems, is there?I was just about to say the same thing, except it may not even sadism, but an extreme selfishness, inability to empathize, and idiocy. Maybe it's because I've seen this stuff happen way to much, but to assume that it could only be due to mental illness is just silly.

[panamajack]

I'd consider an inability to empathize -- to the point that one puts the child in a clothes dryer -- to be a sign of mental illness.


There are some threads where Google Ads just really don't belong.
washer & dryer repair, right now.

[BabaBooey]

I'd consider an inability to empathize -- to the point that one puts the child in a clothes dryer -- to be a sign of mental illness.


There are some threads where Google Ads just really don't belong.
washer & dryer repair, right now.

Does decapitating your four year old sound insane? What about hiding (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,177609,00.html) it in the woods afterwards?

[want2know]

Well, if her actions are the result of postnatal psychosis, then preventing her breeding will effectively be an instance of eugenics against the temporarily mentally ill. And, yes, it is just sick by definition.
Eugenics, my ass! If I read the article correctly (and if my math skills are still up to scratch), this crazy bitch had a 1-year old...and a three-month old !!! That barely gave her time for a coffee break before she got pregnant again!
This is one baby-making machine that needs to be de-activated post haste!
In fact, I think sterilization should be mandatory for any mother who commits a crime of this grievous magnitude against her own child. That is, if she manages to dodge the needle (which I sincerely hope she doesn't).

Just because you do something crazy doesn't mean you are necessarily insane.

[BobLibDem]

The problem with that line of reasoning is that some crimes must then be so horrific that the commision of them automatically qualifies the perpetrator as insane: the more horrific the crime, the greater the degree of exculpation.

That occured to me too. Maybe I should back off and say there's a 99% chance she's crazy. Test her and if she is insane, she gets committed and if not, she gets tried. Personally, I think it unlikely a sane person would do such a thing in hopes of exchanging barred windows for padded ones.

[jackelope]

In fact, I think sterilization should be mandatory for any mother who commits a crime of this grievous magnitude against her own child.Oklahoma's Habitual Criminal Sterilization Act was struck down (http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=316&invol=535) by the Supreme Court as violative of the 14th Amendment in 1942.

[Martin Hyde]

Postnatal depression is a debilitating condition. In around 1 in 1000 new mothers, extreme psychosis can result endangering both the mother, her children and the people around her.

Civilisation does not execute the insane. Killing your own child is almost the definition of "insane": I genuinely struggle to believe that this person of sound mind coldly and deliberately put their 3 month old in a drier and called the police.

So to be considered insane, and thus immune from criminal punishment, one just needs to make sure their crime is sufficiently heinous that no "sane" person would commit it?

[Martin Hyde]

I don't care if she has a mental illness, unless it can be demonstrated that she did not know the difference between right and wrong should be she excluded from prosecution. They determined that woman who drowned her four kids was off her rocker, but being off your rocker != acquittal in the United States. You have to demonstrate that you were criminally insane to the point that you did not know the difference between right and wrong.

So, do you guys also give a pass to that guy that killed his baby because it was bothering him while he played EverQuest?

Or the guy who put his baby in a microwave and fried it?

Or is it only in the case of a woman killing (or maiming) a baby that we should automatically assume the person has to be insane?

[Hamlet]

Maybe I should back off and say there's a 99% chance she's crazy.Based on what evidence?

[Scissorjack]

The point is that we don't know - and I suspect none of us is qualified to judge, especially on the basis of a short article - whether she's mentally ill or not: she may well be, of course, but the assumption that all horrific crimes must by definition by committed by the mentally ill is a very dangerous one. Perhaps she's just evil.

[EvilGhandi]

Aww come on,

All she did was "allegedly placing her 3-month-old son in a clothes dryer "

And it only resulted in " third-degree burns over 50 percent of his body "

I mean, really, who here can say they have never done that?

Ok That was a little trollish. Satire has its uses and this is one of them. I have two sons, one a proud twenty something the other a pain in the ass fourten year old bastard and all I can think is WTF??

[EvilGhandi]

Err... by "pain in the ass fourteen year old bastard", I meant perfectly normal teen boy.

Must have been somthing wrong with my keyboard.

[SentientMeat]

I repeat, I genuinely struggle to believe that she is of sound mind and carried out this act coldly and deliberately before phoning the police, when postnatal psychosis is a known condition.

But then again, I also genuinely struggle to understand how the US can be called "civilised".

[Scissorjack]

Ouch. I foresee tears before bedtime.

[Kalhoun]

That's a dangerous assumption.
I don't understand why it would be dangerous. It is what it is. A woman who apparently lacks the maternal instinct to protect and nurture, and instead murders her child, isn't playing with a full deck. There could be a number of reasons for it, ranging from drug or alcohol abuse, post-partum depression, schizophrenia, or any number of reasons. There is something wrong with her that keeps her from behaving the way the vast majority of women behave toward their children.

[Kalhoun]

I don't care if she has a mental illness, unless it can be demonstrated that she did not know the difference between right and wrong should be she excluded from prosecution. They determined that woman who drowned her four kids was off her rocker, but being off your rocker != acquittal in the United States. You have to demonstrate that you were criminally insane to the point that you did not know the difference between right and wrong.

So, do you guys also give a pass to that guy that killed his baby because it was bothering him while he played EverQuest?

Or the guy who put his baby in a microwave and fried it?

Or is it only in the case of a woman killing (or maiming) a baby that we should automatically assume the person has to be insane?
You're talking about "legal" crazy rather than "clinical" crazy. There's a huge difference.

[Quartz]

Is there an undercurrent of sexism here? The woman is being suggested to be mentally ill, but were it the father, I doubt we'd hear a peep of that.

[BobLibDem]

Based on what evidence?

I think we have a natural instinct not to murder our own children. Murder is of course taboo everywhere, murdering children a step beyond that, and murdering them in such a macabre way a step beyond that. It's behavior that is so far out of the norm that I have a hard time believing that a sane person would ever do it.

[SentientMeat]

Is there an undercurrent of sexism here?Post-childbirth depression/psychosis is more common in the one gender that undergoes the actual childbirth.

[Hentor the Barbarian]

Is there an undercurrent of sexism here? The woman is being suggested to be mentally ill, but were it the father, I doubt we'd hear a peep of that.Really? You don't think that, were a father to put a baby into the dryer, the suggestion that he was mentally ill would not be made? I find that unlikely.

And why is it that you suspect this bias against men?

I'm thinking of the instances I've heard of in which fathers killed children, and I cannot recall thinking other than there was some sort of mental illness involved.

[ms.deanna]

Oh, she's definately insane. The knee-jerk reaction is "make sure she never breeds again, and get her out of society forever." But....a dryer? That's just sick.
I agree with that. I say beat the holy livin' shit out of her, then spay her, then lock the bitch up. I don't even give a fuck if she's crazy.

[slaphead]

I agree with that. I say beat the holy livin' shit out of her, then spay her, then lock the bitch up. I don't even give a fuck if she's crazy.
Hmmm. If shes going to be locked up for the rest of her natural, then isn't the middle step a little redundant? And what's the first step supposed to accomplish, other than make you feel better?

I can't say that I'm too surprised that a schoolgirl with two kids at the age of eighteen has ended up as a horrific headline and an advertisement for birth control. There's a reason why having kids is normally reserved for slightly later in life these days.

non-Fox linky with more background (http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/metro/index.ssf?/base/news-12/1134027521231650.xml)

[SentientMeat]

Surprise surprise:Authorities said Adams, who also has a 13-month-old daughter, was apparently tired of Jailand's crying and may have been suffering from postpartum depression, a hormonal imbalance linked in rare cases to mothers exhibiting psychotic behavior toward their newborn children.

[lisacurl]

If she's guilty, the help she needs comes in a pair of 50cc syringes. First one, phenobaratol. Second one, potassium-saline. Or it could come at the end of a rope, or in an airtight room with potassium cyanide gas.

Then again, this is Louisiana...
Yeah, because we celebrate people who kill babies down here. :rolleyes:

[buttonjockey308]

It doesn't matter, IMO, if you're a nutter, or just a sick fuck, people who do stuff like this get no quarter from me. You can fix this problem in four easy steps.

1. dig hole
2. stand (criminal) in front of hole
3. shoot (criminal) in the forehead
4. fill hole back in

No, it's not elegant. No, it's not politically correct. No, it's not even merciful, but you know what, it doesn't matter in the least WHY she did it, just that she did. Despite all of the rhetoric, humans, just like any other mass produced "product" can be defective to the point they need to be returned. Sure, it's hypocritical to kill the killer, but in the name of saving just one MORE life than the one you took, IMO, it's worth it.

[Kalhoun]

It doesn't matter, IMO, if you're a nutter, or just a sick fuck, people who do stuff like this get no quarter from me. You can fix this problem in four easy steps.

1. dig hole
2. stand (criminal) in front of hole
3. shoot (criminal) in the forehead
4. fill hole back in

No, it's not elegant. No, it's not politically correct. No, it's not even merciful, but you know what, it doesn't matter in the least WHY she did it, just that she did. Despite all of the rhetoric, humans, just like any other mass produced "product" can be defective to the point they need to be returned. Sure, it's hypocritical to kill the killer, but in the name of saving just one MORE life than the one you took, IMO, it's worth it.
Aaaah...with all the flair and grace of a Nazi war criminal to boot! I knew there was sumpn' good gonna come from the war! I KNEW IT!

[PunditLisa]

Aaaah...with all the flair and grace of a Nazi war criminal to boot! I knew there was sumpn' good gonna come from the war! I KNEW IT!

Silly man, a true Nazi war criminal would have the condemned person dig their own grave. Say what you want about the Germans; they're damned efficient.

[Hamlet]

I think we have a natural instinct not to murder our own children. Murder is of course taboo everywhere, murdering children a step beyond that, and murdering them in such a macabre way a step beyond that. It's behavior that is so far out of the norm that I have a hard time believing that a sane person would ever do it.Around 600 children under the age of 5 are murdered every year. Of those 60% are killed by a parent.

[Talon Karrde]

Silly man, a true Nazi war criminal would have the condemned person dig their own grave. Say what you want about the Germans; they're damned efficient.
Thanks for the laugh, I needed it (I'm serious).

[Zoe]

Scumpup: We put down rabid dogs because they are sick and dangerous, even if they were beloved pets.

Rabid dogs are not generally covered under due process.

buttonjockey308: Sure, it's hypocritical to kill the killer, but in the name of saving just one MORE life than the one you took, IMO, it's worth it.

But the problem with that thinking is that when you become the killer, then someone has to kill you and so on. It really doesn't make sense to start. That's why many of us assume that she was nuts. Most people aren't thrilled at the idea of killing other people.

When a baby is murdered by a mother, I just automatically assume that it is post-natal psychosis. I can't help it. That's just the first thing that comes to mind. That doesn't mean I'm not willing to change my mind. If I were a police investigator, I wouldn't make that assumption, but I would certainly keep it in mind. I think there are probably more women who suffer from post natal psychosis than there are women who murder their children intentionally.

When a person is psychotic, they are brain-damaged. It may not last forever, but it's real. I hope it never happens to anyone you love.

By the way, Andrea Yeager is getting a new trial, I believe. (Wasn't that her name?)

[PrehensileRectum]

By the way, Andrea Yeager is getting a new trial, I believe. (Wasn't that her name?)

Andrea Yates

[Ranchoth]

There are some actions so horrific that they simply cannot be done by a person that is mentally competent.

So...I guess most of the Japanese Army in Nanking was made up of uncontrollable lunatics, then? A little Haldol and they all would have been happy campers?

Look, I'm just saying that a person can do plenty of awful, screwed-up stuff without having to drag "crazy" in the mix.

[Tenar]

How about we all wait and find out what the truth is here? She could just be a selfish bitch, or she could be psychotic, and if anyone thinks we have enough information to know the difference right now, I'd hate to have you on a jury.

[Uvula Donor]

1. dig hole
2. stand (criminal) in front of hole
3. shoot (criminal) in the forehead
4. fill hole back in


Your plan goes completely to shit if the criminal falls forward.

[ms.deanna]

Hmmm. If shes going to be locked up for the rest of her natural, then isn't the middle step a little redundant? And what's the first step supposed to accomplish, other than make you feel better?

I can't say that I'm too surprised that a schoolgirl with two kids at the age of eighteen has ended up as a horrific headline and an advertisement for birth control. There's a reason why having kids is normally reserved for slightly later in life these days.

non-Fox linky with more background (http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/metro/index.ssf?/base/news-12/1134027521231650.xml)
I lost my mind for a minute. Now that I see how that sounded, I apologize. :o

[SisterCoyote]

Your plan goes completely to shit if the criminal falls forward.


I am so going to hell for laughing at this.

[buttonjockey308]

Aaaah...with all the flair and grace of a Nazi war criminal to boot! I knew there was sumpn' good gonna come from the war! I KNEW IT!


From Zero to Godwin in 44 posts... :rolleyes:

Look, Kalhoun no one is talking about the war, there was no reason what-so-ever to bring it up, but there it is. So by your logic then, it's the fault of the current administration and the Iraq war that this poor defective soul killed her innocent child in the fucking CLOTHES DRYER. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

My opinion, therefore, that when you kill your child in such a manner, that the resultant punishment ALSO be death, stems from the ideals of the current administration and the Iraq War.

You are either an idiot, an antagonist, or devoid of reason, perhaps a mixture of the three. Or, maybe you're just lacking the faculties required to have a civilized argument about a divisive issue like this one. In any case, please piss off.

Uvula Donor... HA!

[mswas]

We define insanity so arbitrarily in this country. People who commit horrible crimes have some sort of emotional/mental reason for doing so, in 100% of cases. We label some as insane and others as sane, it has nothing to do with science, it has to do with our pure emotional reaction to the stimulus. The harder it is to comprehend their actions the more likely it seems they are insane. Some people are sadistic and cruel, and generally a lot smarter than the state psychiatrists who examine them, sometimes because of this intelligence and awareness of their own actions, they get executed, other times they play the psychiatrist and get an insanity plea.

I mean does it really matter if the woman was insane? She put her baby in the dryer, I'd say she was insane, but I don't know that whether or not she was insane should have anything to do with what happened to her. I think punishing her in some extreme fashion would be more about emotional satisfaction for the direct victims and the Hoi Polloi than anything else. I simply don't think her mental capacity really factors into it. Executions are about gestalt, not justice.

So I say fuck it, fry the bitch, it doesn't really matter one way or another. It's a good thing because it will entertain people like the ones posting in this thread. I mean, how is a woman who puts her baby in the dryer more or less insane than a man that beats his wife to death in a drunken rage? What's the difference, there was some mental/emotional issue at play in both instances, some lack that was not addressed in their lifetime.

I would say we might want to remove such sickness from the gene pool, make sure it doesn't get passed on. Unfortunately though, the psychiatric industry has decided that human behavior itself is a disorder, from fidgeting(ADHD), to worrying about work (OCD), to having an overactive imagination (Schizophrenia), or having your up days and down days, (Manic Depression). So what exactly seperates the sane from the insane these days? Why is one murder insane when another isn't? Is there more to it than simply an emotional reaction to a stimulus that disturbs us? Why is it worse to kill a baby than a grown man?

Erek

[mswas]

Your plan goes completely to shit if the criminal falls forward.

Shoot them with the right calibre slug, and you can very easily determine which way the body will fall.

[buttonjockey308]

Aaaah...with all the flair and grace of a Nazi war criminal to boot! I knew there was sumpn' good gonna come from the war! I KNEW IT!


From Zero to Godwin in 44 posts... :rolleyes:

Look, Kalhoun no one is talking about the war, there was no reason what-so-ever to bring it up, but there it is. So by your logic then, it's the fault of the current administration and the Iraq war that this poor defective soul killed her innocent child in the fucking CLOTHES DRYER. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

My opinion, therefore, that when you kill your child in such a manner, that the resultant punishment ALSO be death, stems from the ideals of the current administration and the Iraq War.

You are either an idiot, an antagonist, or devoid of reason, perhaps a mixture of the three. Or, maybe you're just lacking the faculties required to have a civilized argument about a divisive issue like this one. In any case, please piss off.

Uvula Donor... HA!

[Kalhoun]

From Zero to Godwin in 44 posts... :rolleyes:

Look, Kalhoun no one is talking about the war, there was no reason what-so-ever to bring it up, but there it is. So by your logic then, it's the fault of the current administration and the Iraq war that this poor defective soul killed her innocent child in the fucking CLOTHES DRYER. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
No, sweetie. The war reference was regarding WWII. You know...the one with Nazis? Those guys you emulate when you decide to put bullets in people's skulls and let them fall into graves? Follow along. Use your finger if necessary.
My opinion, therefore, that when you kill your child in such a manner, that the resultant punishment ALSO be death, stems from the ideals of the current administration and the Iraq War.

You are either an idiot, an antagonist, or devoid of reason, perhaps a mixture of the three. Or, maybe you're just lacking the faculties required to have a civilized argument about a divisive issue like this one. In any case, please piss off. Heil, muthafuckah.

[kidchameleon]

Shoot them with the right calibre slug, and you can very easily determine which way the body will fall.

I think the position of the criminal is of far greater importance than the slug used.

[Kalhoun]

[QUOTE=buttonjockey308]

Or, maybe you're just lacking the faculties required to have a civilized argument about a divisive issue like this one. In any case, please piss off.

QUOTE]
Yeah. I'm definitely looking to you for lessons on how to be civlized. You big strong man, you!

[Mr2001]

I would say we might want to remove such sickness from the gene pool, make sure it doesn't get passed on.
Seems like a sickness that makes you kill your own children is already trying to remove itself from the gene pool.

Why is it worse to kill a baby than a grown man?
Indeed. If I didn't think I'd get flamed to hell, I'd say it's better, not worse. I'd say the killers of grown men are a greater threat, even if they are more sane than this particular woman. I'd compare it to destroying an artist's blank canvas vs. destroying a completed painting: the canvas has the potential to become any painting, but so does every other blank canvas, and it's not hard to get a new one.

[Scumpup]

I'd compare it to destroying an artist's blank canvas vs. destroying a completed painting: the canvas has the potential to become any painting, but so does every other blank canvas, and it's not hard to get a new one.

You're a dumbass. Your wonderful little metaphor presupposes that a "completed painting" is automatically of greater value that a blank canvas. I disagree vehemently. There's an awful lot of completed paintings out there that would dramatically improve the world by their removal. Blank canvases are precious precisely because each one has the potential to become something great.

[Mr2001]

You're a dumbass. Your wonderful little metaphor presupposes that a "completed painting" is automatically of greater value that a blank canvas. I disagree vehemently. There's an awful lot of completed paintings out there that would dramatically improve the world by their removal.
One might argue that there are an awful lot of grown people out there who would dramatically improve the world by their removal, too. However, even they have accumulated a lifetime of experiences, and they've left a lasting impression on thousands of other people. People have come to know them as individuals, and they cannot be replaced.

Blank canvases are precious precisely because each one has the potential to become something great.
Then why is it that no one takes out insurance contracts protecting their blank canvases for millions of dollars? I mean, they all have the potential to become the next Picasso (http://www.forbes.com/free_forbes/2005/0606/134.html), so by your logic, they should be worth at least as much.

But obviously, they aren't. They're cheap commodities, because one blank canvas is no better than another. The blank canvas doesn't become as valuable as a masterpiece, or as worthless as a crappy painting, until there's paint on it.

[Scumpup]

One might argue that there are an awful lot of grown people out there who would dramatically improve the world by their removal, too. However, even they have accumulated a lifetime of experiences, and they've left a lasting impression on thousands of other people. People have come to know them as individuals, and they cannot be replaced..

The shit I took this morning can't be replaced either. It was the product of factors and events that cannot be exactly duplicated. Does that mean I should have kept it?


Then why is it that no one takes out insurance contracts protecting their blank canvases for millions of dollars? I mean, they all have the potential to become the next Picasso (http://www.forbes.com/free_forbes/2005/0606/134.html), so by your logic, they should be worth at least as much.

But obviously, they aren't. They're cheap commodities, because one blank canvas is no better than another. The blank canvas doesn't become as valuable as a masterpiece, or as worthless as a crappy painting, until there's paint on it.

Look, we aren't literally talking about paintings. Perhaps I confused you by staying with your metaphor. This issue is grown people compared to babies. What paintings sell for is not germane. Every infant is potentially great, though not all of them achieve greatness. A good many adults are worthless scumbags whose removal could only improve the world. That is the point.

[Mr2001]

The shit I took this morning can't be replaced either. It was the product of factors and events that cannot be exactly duplicated. Does that mean I should have kept it?
That's up to you, since it was yours. Your morning shit was "snowflake unique": different from every other one, but only in ways that don't matter (unless you're cataloging shits as part of some research project, in which case I don't want to know about it).

What paintings sell for is not germane.
Oh, but it is. This is the Straight Dope, and stamping out ignorance is always germane. You claimed blank canvases were precious because they could potentially become something great, but a quick glance at the real world reveals that to be false. People do not place a high value on common, easily replaceable things, even if they can someday become great and unique.

Every infant is potentially great, though not all of them achieve greatness. A good many adults are worthless scumbags whose removal could only improve the world. That is the point.
Of course, every infant is potentially a worthless scumbag, too.

Their potential doesn't make them precious, because they're easily replaced by another one that has exactly the same potential.. like a blank canvas. A chunk of stone is potentially a great statue, and a blank CD-R is potentially a best-selling album, but neither of them are worth much at all as long as they remain blank, either in terms of money or in terms of how far we would go to protect them.