Quote:
Originally Posted by Jel
so it should be on what your personal decision would be?
and again, regardless of whether she did get fired, could be fired, the rights and wrongs of firing her for that - his INTENT was to cause her harm in a variety of ways, and most likely achieved.
Just because *you* and *your* culture/environment wouldn't see it as being harmful in the mental sense, that doesn't mean she didn't suffer mental harm in *her* environment, amongst others of that same environment.
If you are arguing that environment shouldn't exist - I agree with that, and in a perfect world, no harm would be caused to her mentally because society wouldn't push that train of thought on an individual. The problem then is, your argument about the 1 year (or 1 day, or 5 years, or a lifetime, or death by lethal injection) in jail has zero relevance. literally zero.
|
It would be my personal decision (within law) if I would be a judge, but I am not. But someone was judge for that case, and someone did the law.
Intent to cause harm is not that relevant. It's fucking common, we would be all in jail for that. I don't think there is any person who wouldn't have called names or something like that.
The sentence is all that is relevant. That is what matters. Although in your US thinking, if you are able to label someone as criminal, you are willing to give all kind of punishments, fair or not. It's kinda you are some decent white folk or fucking criminal, there is no middle road, mercy, humanity, or whatever. It's all about the look, not what you actually do or are. US is religous, so where is the turning the cheek, loving enemies and so on, all the Christian stuff? More like muslims if you ask me: eye for an eye and that stuff.