I wish I could just say I’m speechless, or slap my knee and laugh at the absurd hand dealt by what are shrugged off as "unintended consequences" by most, but the cause and implications are just all too unsurprising. So perhaps I should not have titled this "Boggles," because it really does not boggle my mind. Ever heard of the Wannsee Conference? I blogged about it here, too.

The core principle at work is not just that the law is the law, but that it can be used to harm people rather than to effect justice. (An aspect of the conference rarely identified explicitly, is that more than it being a stage to get everyone on board, it was an effort to ensure that the Final Solution was legal according to German federal law.)

We are headed down a road, now, in America where the law has even taken on a new twist. Not only is it used in the aforementioned manner, but as an opportunity for prosecutors to advance their careers. Can you imagine the soil that must stain the soul of the prosecutor and district attorney who decided to prosecute these two kids, when the tragic circumstances are but a family matter that some families have endured literally for millenia? In fact, there was a time in human history when such things were entirely natural (that’s why, dummies, kinds can procreate from the age of 12 or 13). And, if not, then ask yourselves why your loving God created such a situation.

I suppose that we can only hope that a judge somewhere abandons "proper judicial philosophy," which requires that he or she operate as a virtual machine, letting the chips fall where they may — allowing "democracy," in due course, to tackle any consequences just too uncomfortable for the conscience of the times to bear.

Now, I’m depressed. Just ask yourself: if the law can do what it intends to do to these misguided but ultimately unfortunate kids, then what do you suppose it can do to you?

Join Over 5,000 Subscribers!

Get exclusive content sent directly to your inbox.

Please enter a valid email address.
Something went wrong. Please check your entries and try again.

Richard Nikoley

I started writing Free The Animal in late 2003 as just a little thing to try. 20 years later, turns out I've written over 5,000 posts. I blog what I wish...from diet, health, philosophy, politics, social antagonism, adventure travel, expat living, location and time independent—while you sleep— income by geoarbitrage, and food pics. I intended to travel the world "homeless," but the Covidiocy Panicdemic squashed that. I became an American expat living in Thailand. I celebrate the audacity and hubris to live by your own exclusive authority and take your own chances. ... I leave the toilet seat up. Read More


  1. Richard Nikoley on December 12, 2006 at 07:03


    I see how that could be misinterpreted, but such was not intended. I'm talking about the general malaise with regard to the law and its exercise. I'm fully aware of your position on the matter which your post makes clear.

  2. Richard Nikoley on December 12, 2006 at 07:12


    I've gone and made an edit I hope you find satisfactory. Keep up the good work.

  3. Richard Nikoley on December 12, 2006 at 11:19


    I'm sure future errors on my part can be most easily avoided by refraining from linking to any of your articles.

    Sorry for the trouble.

  4. John Lopez on December 11, 2006 at 20:23

    Here's a similar one from years ago.

    Remember that Twilight Zone episode "To Serve Man"? The popular excuse "It's for the children" is taking on a similar, sinister meaning.

  5. CLS on December 12, 2006 at 06:13

    I am glad you picked up the story which we blogged about two days earlier. But I am baffled that you said, "what are shrugged off as "unintended consequences,"". You then link to our site at that point which clearly implies that we shrugged this off as an "unintended consequence". Not only was that phrase never used by us it was never even implied. And anyone who reads our comments will know we were furious about this matter. Surely it gives your readers a false view of our position to only link to the source for your information with the comment that some shrug this off.

  6. CLS on December 12, 2006 at 11:13

    I did not say it was intentional. I said it gave a false impression and implied something that was not true. The correction is fine and appreciated. Maybe I'm paranoid but I figure I get in enough trouble for the things I do say that I may as well try to avoid getting into trouble for things I didn't say.

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.