Wednesday, March 02, 2005
totally trashes the argument that someone who is too young to buy a beer is too young to be executed... pointing out that while there is no system in place to determine which 17 year olds are mature and responsible enough to drink, there is such a system for determining which 17 year old criminals should be treated as adults by the courts.
Beldar's slam dunk makes you realize, as I posted yesterday, that those on the other side of this argument made their decision based on emotion, and not on an analysis of precedent, legislative intent or even common sense. Somewhat like the Queen of Hearts, they decided first, rationalized later. Keep in mind that was is most important to them is the outcome, not the process by which the outcome is determined. If the rationale sucks, so be it. They're laughing at us... after all, it doesn't matter how well Beldar or Scalia ridicule their reasoning - they got what they wanted.