Acceptability of violence

| 04/01/2010

Given that I’ve spent the last six months writing a great dealabout violent crime from a perspective of police news stories and from inside the court, I’ve had the opportunity to think a lot about what is going on, and while I may well be wrong, I personally believe the problem is the cultural acceptability of violence to resolve disputes.

From the obsession with possessing guns under the guise of self defence and the constant comments about beating children to the acceptance of domestic abuse, among other issues, common not just in Cayman but throughout modern western culture, it seems that violence is accepted. Whether it starts by whipping your kids, keeping your woman in line, gaining respect, defending your property, the death penalty, governments declaring war on countries because they  believe they have right on their side, all of it is down to justified violence.

At the risk of enormous criticism I’m going to stick my neck out and say I think when children are brought up in homes where parents use violence to discipline them, combined with a lack of security and love, you will produce very violent people. When children are not taught to love themselves and are shown that it is possible to get your way through violence they will grow up to be violent people, especially in a world where violence is used as a means of achieving goals. These youngsters who are currently shooting each other are angry and resentful.  When they think that someone has disrespected them they respond in the only way they have been taught.

The parent that stoops to slap the five year old boy for being too loud in Fosters thinks nothing of it if it achieves the result of making the child conform, but the message delivered to that five year old is that violence achieves an end. You can get want you want by forcing others to do what you want through doing them harm. Simple. While it may seem outrageous to many that the idea of slapping your child for being naughty can turn him into a ‘gun toting gangsta’ (and I agree there are a few more ingredients required a long the way) there does seem to be something in it.

The countries in the west that seem to have the lowest levels of violent crime and the ones with lower rates of social problems are the northern European countries such as the Scandinavian states. These countries which outlawed any kind of violence against children years ago tend to be much more peaceful nations. Compared to other European or North American communities and the Caribbean, where parents still use violence, but which have similar social and economic resources, these countries have comparatively very low levels of violence.

Violence is used by many governments as control mechanism, and when used to its extreme it demonstrably can control people. On the surface Iraq under Saddam Hussein and Afghanistan under the Taliban had considerably less crime but certainly no less violence. Dictatorships can use violence to quash violent crime because they are simply all powerful and unlimited or unsanctioned in the levels of violence they can display and it gives the veneer of control. However, get things out of balance and one arrives at the failed state of places such as Somalia, for example.

If we are to examine all of the world’s war zones we see that most stem from governments or political groups attempting to use violence to get their way and it rarely works in the long run. Even if you are strong enough to prevail in the initial war, those who have suffered at the hand of violence will keep fighting back, as demonstrated by the growing levels of terrorism in the world as a response to the violent power of the state.

Sometime in thesixties a generation of people tried to promote the idea of world peace, love and harmony among the human race. Half a century later, however, their message has been drowned out by the gun fire.

I have no answer because not only do I hate any kind of violence, I don’t understand it and I don’t feel it. I cannot ever understand how one a human being could shoot, stab or chop at another. How a man who professes to love a woman can raise his hand to her or how a parent can hit a child.

I do not know if violence is a learned behaviour or inherent – nature  or nurture – perhaps it is a bit of both. Even if it is a fundamental human characteristic, do we not at this point in our evolution still have the intelligence to overcome the urge to commit acts of violence on our fellow human beings and begin teaching our children that all acts of violence no matter how small are wrong.

Although I am not a Christian, at school we were still taught lessons from the Bible, many of which I believe were valuable. I do not need to believe there is an omnipotent being somewhere in the sky to believe that if we all turned the other cheek and did unto others and all that stuff the world we live in would be a darn sight nicer. And yet many practicing Christians I have met agree with violence, be it towards corporal punishment forchildren or in regards to the death penalty, which is supported most vociferously in the US by the Christian right, as well as the right to bear arms.

In recent weeks there have been an awful lot of comments posted on CNS about the crime problem and calling for an end to the violence. But often those calls come with suggestions of perpetrating more violence or condemning society, the police, parents, schools, prison, etc, for not being violent enough.  I can’t help but think that’s the problem.

Perhaps I’m wrong and of course I’m sure you’re all going to point out my naivety, and I don’t deny being something of an old peacenik, pinkie, tree-hugging, cowardly, liberal at heart that always tries to see the funny, rather than the angry, side of life …… but you know what?  I really do wish people could find a way to resolve disputes without bombing, shooting, stabbing, punching, hitting or slapping each other.  Anyway, that’s my two cents for the New Year.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Category: Viewpoint

About the Author ()

Comments (42)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. anonymous says:

    A very occassional last ditch corrective swat to the rear end is quite a bit different than the routine punching, slapping, whipping, broken bones and injuries that can be first line disciplinary tools for some adults.  Although it’s easy to condemn the later, they may be unable to articulate their disappointment in any other way, are unaccustomed to alternate resolutions, and probably aren’t students of child psychology.  Primal restraint all boils down to how you were nurtured as a child and education (which may be one in the same for some).

  2. Anonymous says:


    Study: Spanked Children May Grow Up to Be Happier and More Successful

    Interesting reserach on spanking….but you have to read it, it doesn’t say abuse, and only up to a certain age.  By the way, you still need good parenting skills outside of this potential tool in your household.,2933,581882,00.html?loomia_ow=t0:s0:a4:g4:r2:c0.000000:b0:z5

  3. Anonymous says:

    First, this is a well written article, thank again CNS for a great news outlet!

    Second, your most profound statement that is true is, "brought up in homes where parents use violence to discipline them, combined with a lack of security and love, you will produce very violent people."

    I think that you nailed the head of the nail on that statement.  It is my beleif that spanking (not violent or bruising type) does have its place on occasion.  However, that can not be the means to the end.  As the end of your sentence stated "lack of security and love", is needed. 

    The main issue thought I see is not whether parents spank/don’t spank/etc, but that parents are EVEN around to raise their children.  Study after study shows that latchkey kids (those where parents really could care less if they spend any time with them) are the ones often in trouble, are violent, don’t succeed, etc.

    So in essence, it is like a never ending trail, you have one kid raised without parents, he/she has kids, then they have kids, and now you have a lot of kids that haven’t had any parents to teach them how to be good parents, or for that matter how to be a responsible citizen.  It is the MLM (multi level marketing) effect.

    The point is, as I have stated before, parents need to start raising their kids and teaching them, and SPENDING time with them.  Children need parents who are around, period! 

    And before anyone attacks of, well I gotta work, etc….let me say this to you.  Don’t have kids if you aren’t in a committed relationship and can afford to have kids.  If your not going to spend anytime with your kids don’t have them, please save the rest of society by doing the right thing.

  4. Oral says:

    If the church is the answer to crime in Cayman then how come a sociological study comissioned by the government found that more than 90 percent of the Caymanian inmates at Northward Prison had attended church regularly throughout their childhood.

    No doubt they were thoroughly spanked on a regular basis by their Christian mothers too.

    There is a lot of praying and preaching going on in our prison today. Nonetheless, the rate at which prisoners reoffend is high.


    So what’s the problem? Why isn’t Christianity working? Maybe we should try Islam.


    Oral Swaggart

    ps. The comment about intelligent design is just sad. Please read a book written by a real scientist.

  5. Anonymous says:

    2 dunces that don’t believe in

    God but they believe in evolution.

    Well we located two dunces today.

    • Lala Land says:

      Show us the firmament and we will start listening to arguments that Genesis is anything other than a Bronze Agre creation myth.

      And it should be easy to prove this – the Tower of Babel crashed through it so it can’t be that high.

      Go on.  Make God happy.  Go on, go on, go on.

      • Lala Land says:

        Anyone?  Anyone?  No answer to this?  Well how can we beleive in the rest of the stuff then?

        • Anonymous says:

          Sorry for my tardiness, I had actually moved on to newer stories, but was drawn back here and saw this.

          #1. The firmament (and I will skip the theology and give you the short version) is a double reference to a. space and everything in it, and b. the top layer of the atmosphere that touches space.  This is the same layer that space-ships have to descend through at a certain angle because of the extreme friction – this coincides with the ‘hardness’ aspect of the firmament.

          The Tower of Babel didn’t crash through it, the builders of the Tower wanted to pierce the firmament and God stopped them before they did.  The piercing should be looked at as being as much poetic language as physically descriptive, just as we use in our language of today, references to piercing the sky.

          #2.  Let’s apply your logic to  science.  "okay science, you’ve told me a million things on the discovery channel and in the vast majority of cases you have stated that your presentation on my tv is basically an educatedguess, so I am going to pick one of those topics and if you can’t provide a definitive answer, why should I believe in the rest of the stuff then? Same criteria that you used above.

          It never ceases to amaze me how people will hold Christianity to a 100% accuracy rate, judged solely with their own limited understanding, but science, which has not answered the vast majority of questions important to life, gets a pass on an un-proven guess.

          • Beam me up Scottie says:

            The difference is that science is a quest for truth and religion just makes sh*t up.

          • BL Zeebul says:

            How about all the references to the firmament being a solid plane to which the stars are attached and, at times, fall off?  And the problem is that many creationists are literalists and therefore there is no room in their world for poetic licence.

            • Anonymous says:

              I don’t know how you can say many creationists are literalists and mean anything by it.  Are you saying that most creationists are literalists?  Or just a large number? I am not a Creationist, I am a Christian, who takes the book of Genesis literally. I also recognize that other books in the Bible should not be read as only literal, but that there is the use of imagery as well that must be considered, Daniel and Revelation are the best examples of that.  There are alos poetic books, like Song of Solomon, and the Psalms are literally songs.

              The firmament- outer space, is a solid structure – science itself speaks of it. One of those channels (I believe Discovery) does shows on looking at sci-fi movies specifically exploring whether the technology could be created.  There was one on Star Wars or Star Trek that explored the whole folded universe thing when exploring the ‘light-speed’ question. The theory put forward was that the universe could be a large sheet folded over several times, and in order to perfect long distance space travel we would have to burst through the folds where they meet (ie take short-cuts – and no they weren’t talking about going through black-holes, but creating rips in the ‘cloth’), this is not dissimilar to the Bible language you are referring to above.

              As far as stars falling off goes, again it is partly poetic language… if you lived thousands of years ago and someone was explaining what stars were to you there is no way that they could have used the scientific language of today to speak of balls of gas etc. so the image is of a curtain with stars attached and every now and then they fall – for us we can interpret that as being falling stars in some instances and stars burning out in others.

              But I must again make the point you are trying your best to say that if the Bible (or actually those of us that believe it) cannot answer every question to your satisfation then you must reject everything that it says.  But if you apply that same criteria to science you don’t get any further.  Science cannot provide answers to every question, so why do you not reject it as a whole? 

              In fact let’s take the Bible out of it.  Generally speaking, when exploring anything in the scientific comunity there will always be at least two schools of thought, differing in their opinions and having their own hypotheses and conflicting results of testing – medicine is a great example of that.  Neither side can prove to the other that they are right, so what should we do, throw them all out (if we apply the same criteria that you are using to judge the Bible).  But what happens in actuality is this, we examine what both sides say adn we make a choice to hold to one – again, this is an act of faith, and to the poster below, requires a certain degree of making things up.

              Back to our debate.  You think that you have looked at everything and made the sensible choice, and that I must be an idiot for seeing all of this evidence and refusing to budge.  Well I don’t think that we have seen all of the evidence.  I have also seen shows on people sentenced to life in prison or death penalty in which 99% of the evidence pointed to them and the 1% that was not allowed in court was the evidence that 100% ruled those people out.  So that 1% that prevents scientists from making definitive statements, that may just be where the truth lies.

              At the end of the day this debate will never end because of one reason.  The fundamental underlying principle of Christianity is that we must accept Jesus by faith.  Therefore God will not allow either seide to be able to scientifically make that 100% statement.  Because there is no faith needed when we know something definitely.  I know that gravity exists, I don’t have to believe in it, I see it and feel it every day.  There are no missing pieces to gravity, no grey areas. But to accept evolution I have to believe my way through the grey areas.  We are all in the same boat when it comes to that, whether you are willing to accept the point or not.

              I leave you to a story that I heard on the radio locally (guest on Talk Today) and from the original source (testimony on a show on Gospel 88.7).  An Islamic young man was jailed for extremist activities.  He prayed in his cell for a way out because he saw his youth and life being wasted.  He heard a voice say your sins are forgiven.  He said it was strange because in Islam sins get forgiven after death (or something like that, some of the details are foggy now).  He questioned the voice by asking who it was and by what authority the person thought they could forgive sins- because it could not be Allah forgiving sins of a live person.  The voice answered "I am that I am" He knew instinctively that it was Jesus even though he had never been taught anything about Jesus and had never read the Bible.  He got out of prison and converted to Christianity, then months later he saw the verse in the Bible (Exodus 3:14) in which God uses the statement to answer Moses’ questioning him.  God is who He says He is.

              This debate may seem like it is about proving something, but it isn’t, that’s pride, in re-reading some of my points I can honestly admit that I let the debate get the better of me in places and forgot that.  I do not come to war with you, but to introduce you to the Lamb of God, because there is something greater at stake, the spirit that lives in you deserves to live forever.  So I am sorry if I offended, but I pray that God opens your eyes and lets you see the things that He has shown me. Peace.

  6. Spiderman says:

    (CNS: I apologize up front for the length, and if you want to split into 2 or 3 posts feel free, but I hope that you can publish in its entirety.)

    Ms. Ledger, you seem to be writing from a place of pain and I am right there with you.  It hurts me to see what is happening in my country now.   I do not disagree with some of what you have said, but I thank you for your thoughtful piece.

    Firstly, you view spanking to be equivelent of abuse.  This isn’t so.  I was spanked, it was never abuse.  The thing with abuse like that is that both the abuser and the abusee can feel in their conscience that something is not right with what is happening.  The Bible tells us that if we spare the rod we spoil the child.  This is not a call to violence, or abuse, but discipline, given with love and patience. This is not to justify abuse, but to point out that there is a big difference between abuse and discipline, and that spanking a child does not automatically convey the message "I don’t love you" or "I can’t solve problems differently".  There is a time for harder discipline.

    Yes some parents do go too far but they need to be educated, otherwise you are removing the tool because some people don’t use it properly.  Look at our schools since corproral punishment has been removed; that wasn’t the only factor, but ask the children and you will find that it is a strong one. For the record I do not support abuse of women either, and agree that we need to combat this as well, through advocacy, education and proper prosecution.  I would add however that abuse of men is never addressed and that is much more prevelant than people care to examine.

    There are also some cultural differences as play here.  When you hear ‘beat the child’ you automatically think of abuse, when I hear it I automatically think of discipline.  So you have to be careful not to impose your cultural understanding in such a way that you view my cultural understanding as being wrong, they are simply different.  Coincidentally I watched Pocohontas with my daughter the other night, at one point the Native Americans are in one camp and the Eurpoean settlers are in another and they are both pointing out the differences that they see in the other side and calling the other side ‘savages’, very similar to what’s happening today in Cayman because of cultural misunderstanding.

    You also state that we have an abosession with possessing guns in Cayman.  I disagree.  We have always practiced responsible gun ownership, tied to farming.  Fathers taught their children to shoot, and in doing so to respect life and to understand the damage that firearms can cause to life.  in the 80’s people were aware of the gun club, but most people, except those that really loved to shoot for sport, didn’t bother and didn’t see the need for gun ownership.

    In the 90’s and 00’s mass illegal gun ownership reared its ugly head mostly to do with the link between guns and drugs.  it is difficult to curtail this because we are a small island surrounded by water adn boats can come in and out pretty much as they please.  The Customs route is also difficult because of the shear volume of imports that would have to be inspected.  For information, the Port of Miami inspects (at least up until about 3-4 years ago) about 5% of their imports.  Now we are realizing that even with the best efforts of a fully trained Police force, we need new deterrants.  That is why so many people are calling for more legal gun ownerhip – so that we can deter the criminals that are otherwise not afraid (as shown by the number of daylight criminal acts committeed) and also because we as human beings are survivalist and protectionist by nature – we want to be safe and we want to be able to protect our loved ones.

    You do recognize the existence of other factors in your peice.  We were told generations ago that television was a ‘boob-tube’ now we are seeing that television, music and video-games are affecting the behaviour of our children and adults.  Alo in Cayman there is no denying that these problems have risen as our Christianity has become watered down and less practiced.  I know MANY Caymanian parents that do not go to Church and do not carry/send their children to Church or Sunday/Sabbath School – this was something that was completely foreign to me up until the last decade.

    We also have to recognize that our children suffer from stress just as we do.  The world demands far more from them than it did of us, and they have to be guided to manage that stress properly.  We also have to ensure that they have conflict resolution skills, which many of them do not have.  Many of them cannot take being embarrassed in any way (a skill that being spanked teaches by the way) so when they are embarrassed in a nightclub in front of their friends, they resort to violence as a solution.

    One good way to combat this would be to place them in as many potentially embarrassing situations as possible in a positive structured environment – spelling bees, school quiz competitions, debate competitions, group projects, sporting competitions (then make sure that only the winners get prizes- this recent phenomenon of everybody gets a medal does not reflect the real world at all!) in which they compete in front of their peers gives those opportunities to shine and to fail in ways that teach them to accept failure as small and temporary and therefore to be better people, and by extension they will be able to apply this knowledge to dispute resolution.

    We do also need to recognize that our country is facing many problems in common with the majority of countries around the world. Increased crime, the youth in revolt, desperation, negative responses to the economic situation, etc.  So, while I disagree on some points, I share your view that we must be tempered in our response.

    While I take your point on the Scandinavian countries I do not see them as being as successful as you do, they have their share of problems too, many of them have no issues with the kinds of conflicts that we are dealing with because they move to legalize/moralize everything so it’s hard to be a criminal when anything goes; so yes less violence, but at what other costs.  I also don’t think that we should look at their stats as being attributable to outlawing of spanking children, there are a great deal of issues/interventions that have taken place in those states.

    Finally, you speak of Christian confusion regarding advocating violence in corporal punishment or death penalty.  That is not an advocacy of violence.  In the first it is dealing with discipline as I explained earlier, in the second it is recognizing that God has charged the state with punishing crime, and that punishment can be ultimate in the form of the death penalty.  The one that I find interesting is that most liberals I have met abhor the death penalty, and spanking children yet throw their support behind abortion (this is violence), so it’s okay to kill the child, just not spank the child?

    Solutions:  I think the points I made earlier about creating positive environments for our children to practice life skills is the way to go.  I also think that there needs to be more mentorship, not through corporations and groups/service clubs but a genuine relationship between 1 positive adult role model and 1 child.  I also think that we as a community need to open our mouths when we see crime happening.  The Police need to regain the trust of the community by any means.  We need to teach conflict resolution in schools, we need to expand the Cadet Corp (which is a great organization for teaching discipline), as well as create greater access to other similar activities and sports, especailly team sports.

  7. Anonymous says:

    My parents spanked me when verbal instructions and consequences didn’t work.   I don’t shoot and kill people nor beat my spouse.  I grew up dirt poor but I don’t steal.

    Its just not this simple.  Conflict resolution that doesn’t involve violence is good, but let’s face the fact… its not physical violence alone that breeds criminals. Its a combination of factors.

    My children know I love and adore them. They also know that knocking down all the cereal boxes in the grocery store when I’ve told them to leave them alone or refusing to obey their parents will result in a spanking. If they are rude to an adult, there are consequences..sometimes privileges are taken away, but if that doesn’t work.. a quick swat on the rear is the next level.  Do I wish that weren’t necessary.. ABSOLUTELY.. but pandering to their every whim doesn’t work.  Appealing to a 6 year’s sense of reason only works with the 6 year feels like being reasonable and that doesn’t cut it. 

    Yes, there’s a periodic test of authority.  I don’t think they’re going to become criminals because of it.  I certainly didn’t.  I’m no "better" or "smarter" than anyone else.

  8. Anonymous says:

    The single most powerful teacher of violence in the culture in the Cayman Islands is the domestic violence and disrespect taught by parents or other adults to children throughout the country.

    It is a tragedy and for the most part swept under the carpet. Disrespect for women is rampant in the country.


  9. what a mess says:

    Well written Wendy,

    Of course this would require our leaders (Politicians, Police, Teachers, Parents, Clergy and others) to first evaluate and educate themselves…then act in honourable and ethical ways to begin to make a positive impact on others.

    Too often those in authority say one thing then act differently, and somehow expect that others will do whatever they say. Look at the rhetoric of "transparency, accountability and good-governence" that we hear…only to encounter the opposite when the same is called for.

    Look at how much energy our leaders put into keeping Human Rights to a minimum. People are not always able to articulate their frustrations…but they do "feel" it…even when they are not always "aware" of it. And much of that is coming out sideways in the ways you spoke of.

    All forms of abuse are rampant and accepted in much of Cayman society… and we hear the "politically correct" statements made at the appropriate times, but no real change or accountability.

    Just think; Has Cayman had, or does it have any political corruption?…Has anyone ever been charged or convicted of same?…Has anyone profitted by political corruption?…Now, what message does this send….for decades!

    Successive governments have, and continue to be, more interested in their own selfish motives with little real concern for the long term development of Cayman and its people (all of its people).

    And of course we cloak our prejudices and intolerance in religious rhetoric, rather than ask; what would Jesus (or other truly spiritual authority) do?

    We are indeed reaping the seeds we (Cayman) have sown now for decades!

  10. anonymous says:

    Why ;is it that we elect people who are too busy to think or create solutions to social problems and social menaces, yet they get paid top dollars for the community to do the thinking for them.

    Why can’t the courts or the MLA’s or the AG make a soud decision to release these apparently difficult to rehabilitate criminals into the hands of the local churches.

    They do this in the US


    here’w what they are required to do:-


    Report to the police Station daily

    Report to the Pastor twice per week

    Work for the community giving free service or even paid

    Rehab drug program or other counseling

    Re[prt to their probation officer regularly.

    Ah I hit water here. some of these problems is a lack of a probation officer, do we have probation officers in Cayman, if so they are not doing their job, why because their criminals are out looting and robbing and mugging and killing and nobody is accountable as to the whereabouts of these pieces of s***. .

    • 2nd Amendment Lawyer says:

      Forgive me, but Ihave troubling accepting that this is a compulsory programme in the US as it would violate the constitutional separation of churh and state.

  11. Cayman Male says:

    Corporal punishment for the discipline of children should not be confused child violence. Properly administered corporal punishment should be done with a calm spirit and delivered in a controlled manner, where the child knows clearly why they are being disciplined.

    I’m a Caymanian male in my 40’s and grew up in an era when corporal punishment was not only practiced regularly in homes, but also in the schools. I have never hit a female and never got into a physical fight with another adult and still practice the good manners that my Mother, Father (and Teachers) lovingly instilled in with the measured use of corporal punishment.

    In my household, we practice all the “modern” age specific parenting techniques positive re-enforcement, rewards, loss of privileges, time out, grounding and yes spankings as a last resort. My kids are still loving, well mannered, well behaved non-violent individuals. See this link for reference

    I believe inattentive parenting (spend time with them not money on them), lack of discipline (parents letting children with unaddressed discipline issues grow into teens and adults with no discipline or respect for anyone or anything), single parent homes (higher prevalence, can be a risk factor), BET/MTV as well as other forms of glorified anti-social behavior in electronic games, on the internet, on TV , in movies and even in the press. Even the lack wide participation of kids in extra-curricular organized team sports where kids learn how to deal with constructively with conflict, all conspire to lead our young down this terrible road of gangs, drug/alcohol abuse, dangerous driving and yes violence.

    Alas, this is one topic where like Roe Vs. Wade, there is no common ground and the conflict (agree with Wendy or not) is good for increasing the clicks and driving the ad business up. Good one Wendy no Pulitzer but good for business!

    • Nicky Watson says:

      You seem to be suggesting that Wendy’s comment extolling the virtues of non-violence is nothing more that a cynical piece of self-promotion. What a very sad attitude …… also a little bizarre. You’d rather we stuck to bland opinions about nothing in particular (which would probably be more pleasing to many advertisers)?

    • Sucker punched says:

      I started reading this comment and thinking…ok..the guy’s got a point possibly what is needed is a little tough love.  I actually followed the logic to a degree. But the final statement left me thinking here’s an adult who needs some time out.  That was a low blow. Go to your room. I don’t like your style. You’re too paranoid.

  12. What would Rambo do? says:

    I agree Wendy.  Being a peacenik myself (gad how I hate that term because it takes from the sincerity and makes it sound flakey) we really did at one time believe we could change the world to a more peaceful place.  It began with a basic concept:  violence begets violence. Too simple a thing for some to wrap their heads around.  Because, unfortunately, war makes money.  Even the threat of war makes money. The threat of communism, socialism, terrorism, cataclysm, and several other sm’s have also turned profits.  Gangstasm has created new lines of clothing, music, and car accessories. So someone is usually making money off violence, the threat of violence, and the aftermath of violence. But it isn’t us.   Many, many, many people are also unaware of what is done in their name and on their "behalf" to bring violence to others. Disconnected by television, they watch buildings exploding, people running, bodies laying on the street, and say "isn’t that awful? what time is the game on? is the pizza here yet?"  Yet these same people are the first to be suprised when the violence inflicted in their name comes home and arrives on their streets and in their cities.  Do we live in a violent culture?  Indeed we do.  Can we do something about it?  Yes.  But first we must stop it from being a money-making venture by withdrawing our support in every way possible.  Television, government, industry, the military.  Just like is often suggested with gangs….we have to start at the top.

    All we are saying……..demanding…

    Give Peace a Chance.

    • Dennie Warren Jr. says:

      Are you suggesting that all governments disarm themselves?

      • Anonymous says:

        Well of course it would never happen Dennie but it would be bloody marvellous if they did. Think of the money saved and the lives not lost.

        • Dennie Warren Jr. says:

          Of course governments would not disarm themselves, because that would be suicide for civil society.  There would be more murder…  The sad thing about your preference is that you want the good citizens of this world to be at a disadvantage to criminals.  Thank God for all those who have enough humanity in them to resist the hitlers and the street gangs…!

          I should not have to state the obvious so often.  Anyhow, you can ask criminals to please stop committing crimes, but if they ignore you, don’t be surprised.  A question I really would like you to answer is: if criminals with firearms were raping your mother, would you use force to stop them if they resisted or would you keep asking them to please stop?

          The reason why people don’t go around putting their unprotected hands into blazing fires is because there are unbiased consequences for doing so.  You need to learn your history before we can have a sensible discussion about whether the law abiding residents of the Cayman Islands should be submissive to criminals or not.

      • Anonymous says:

        Mr. Warren, I notice that noone has responded to your brilliant post!!  I for sure would not support my Government disarming in the face of the escalating threats coming out of the Middle East and Africa.


      • 2nd Amendment Lawyer says:

        Dennie sure does love his guns and ammo. . .

  13. anonymous says:

    When criminals are released they should be released into the responsibility of the Local church Pastors who will be responsible for their spiritual life, growth and enlightenment.

    It will help to rehabilitte those that want to change.

    Putting them back on the streets with no accountability and no one to a report to but their crminal buddies ony inceases opportuity for more crome.

    sont you all readers agree?\\\\

    the Pastors and the churches need to get together and decide how they will accommodate them in to a rehab program. give them work.

    The churches could buy a piece of land the ministers Association can purchase property, and start a farm and let these prople work on it and make a living, instead of robbing andstealling and mugging people.

    this will take the crime off the street and at the same time provide vegetables, fruits ane provision and livestock for the local community instead of importing everthing escalating prices.


    • Ally Bann says:

      This sounds like something out of Afghanistan.  Bet you don’t accept evolution either do you?

      • Anonymous says:

        So you don’t mind who fixes the problem, as long as it’s not the Church?  This is a very good idea and no it’s nothing like Afghanistan.  Have you ever been to Afghanistan.  I have family over there right now, to compare this suggestion with the way that things are over there is absolutely ridiculous and disrespectful. 

        The fact is we need real habilitation in Cayman, and we need a half-way house set-up to assist ex-criminals in their transition back to society.  If the Church was to set something like this up then it would improve the chances of full-time employment for ex-prisoners because they would be able to say to potential employers that they have made it through this program.  This is opposed to the way that things are now, ex-prisoners that want to reform cannot find work because everyone knows they are ex-prisoners and they then revert back to crime because at the end of the day they need to eat.

        But no let’s not do anything like this, because someone who has absolutely no understanding of Christianity and is caught up in the human rights spider-web of dumbdome would rather have crime than have to recognize the need for Christ in this situation.

      • Anonymous says:

        Ahhhh you do know that evolution is still a theory right… hence has never been proven.  You do also know that there are several scientific theories out there that oppose evolution right and several that support intelligent design right?!  or have you conveniently forgotten that?  Guess what you can no more prove your theory to us than we can prove ours to you.  One day we’ll either all go to sleep and nothing else will happen, or we’ll all go to sleep and wake up to the Judgement.  So basically if we are wrong then it won’t make a difference, but if we are right, you’re pretty much screwed.  I challenge you to read through the Bible cover to cover.  I dare you, then come back and tell me you don’t believe in Jesus Christ.  But don’t cheat, read it, word by word.

        • Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster says:

          That is ridiculous thought process. Science is based on tangible facts and evolution has certainly been proven beyond a doubt.

          You are trying to equate faith with science and this is like comparing apples to organges.

          Trying reading a book besides the bible once in a while – A Devil’s Chaplain by Richard Dawkins would be a good start for you. 

          One cannot prove a negative, and science has no way of establishing the existence or non-existence of a god.

          "I think we can all look forward to the time when these three theories are given equal time in our science classrooms across the country, and eventually the world; One third time for Intelligent Design, one third time for Flying Spaghetti Monsterism, and one third time for logical conjecture based on overwhelming observable evidence."
          Bobby Henderson[7]
          • Anonymous says:

            Actually, NO Evolution has never been proven, that’s why it’s still officially called the Theory of Evolution except when people who believe (note I said believe) in it try to convince the rest of the world that it ‘has beeen proven beyond a reasonable doubt’.  Secondly, the Bible is factual, written history and has proven itself over and over, especially when several books, written at different times several hundred years apart hold the same accurate information when speaking of events that happened after those books were actually written, like the many books that speak of Christ’s crucifixion, or the destruction of Jerusalem – prophetic accuracy.

            Science looks at evidence and based on that evidence make’s deductions that can’t be proven but seem like the most likely probable and reasonable cause/effect of the topic at hand – that my friend is the definition of faith.  You cannot connect the last dots needed to prove evolution theory or the big bang theory, quoting other athiests (especially those afraid to have opposing views presented alongside their own) doesn’t erase that.  In order to grasp onto those theories you have to believe in them because they have not been factually proven, and no self-respecting scientist can claim anything different.

            There is an abundance of scientific evidence in support of intelligent design, and there is also an abundance of scientific evidence that flies in the face of evolution and big bang theories. The problem is that people like Mr. Henderson do their best to try to discredit those who won’t conform and for whom the evidence points in a different direction.

            I have read extensively, including Mr. Henderson’s letter and Darwin himself (who said that if Evolution could not be proven completely then it should be abandonded by the way), I just know you will not be convinced by logical argument – if that were possible you would have already looked around at Creation and deduced the Intelligence in the design – but by a true encounter with Christ.  I pray you get that because my aim is not to fight you, but to introduce you to Him, not for my sake, but for yours.  But you already know that… don’t you.

            • nonsense says:

              Science takes physical evidence, makes deductions, and proves those deductions are correct or incorrect.  These deductions are called hypothesis. Repeated testing of a hypothesis achieving the same results becomes theory. You’ve also confused theory with law, here’s a site for you to read:



              The bible is not factual.

              There is no abundance of evidence to support intelligent design, in fact there is no tangible proof other than the bible, which as stated previously is not factual.


              BTW – I am a praticing Roman Catholic and have been taught science classes from Fransican Friars. They don’t seem to have a problem with evolution.

              My personal belief is that "God" set things in motion – call it a big bang – and then millions of years later man appeared – evolution.

              I’ll pray for you too!

            • dxtr says:

              Which bible are we talking about? (There are many versions.)

              And in which language? The original was not written in English and so the ones used in Cayman must be translations. Which translation are we talking about? And who decided that this was the one and only?

              When you speak a couple of languages you know that there are many ways to translate a sentence, which makes taking the English bible literally a bit a of mockery

            • Half man half octopus says:

              It is still "officially" called a Theory by whom? 

              I suggest you read The Greatest Show On Earth by Richard Dawkins.  The evidence in there is really overwhelming.

              I prefer that scientific evidence to the magic of creationsim any day.

              Please tell us, all you history deniers, how old you think the Earth is. 

            • Anonymous says:

              Charles Weissmann, head of Scripps Florida’s department of infectology who led the study, said: "On the face of it, you have exactly the same process of mutation and adaptive change in prions as you see in viruses. This means that this pattern of Darwinian evolution appears to be universally active."



            • Anonymous says:

              This is completely off-topic but deserves a response due to the astounding errors.

              Evolution through natural selection has certainly been proven beyond a resonable doubt. No self-respecting scientist would ever say that they are 100% sure because that is not how science works. However, it will only take one piece of evidence to contradict natural selection and we’ll go back to the drawing board. Give me a "rabbit in the Precambrian" and I will have a reasonable doubt. There is no evidence to prove that natural selection does not take place and, to the contrary, the fossil record becomes more complete by the day and molecular biologists are able to map more genomes confirming our shared ancestry with all other livng beings.

              The bible, as even biblical scholars acknowledge, is full of inconsistencies. Take Luke and Mattew’s inability to agree on something as simple as Jesus’ genealogy. The difference amounts to something like 30 generations. Some parts are aparently metaphorical whilst others are meant to be taken literally, but again there is little agreement amongst Christians as to which is which. Incidentally, I would never recommend the old testament as a moral code; is it really ok to wipe out a tribe and enslave the virgins? (several cases) Or, to offer one’s virgin daughters to be raped? (Genesis 19)

              The bible would be a credible source if the different books were written on different continents, yet still agreed. However, the Australian aborigines, to give one example, had no idea about Christianity before Europeans arrived and are apparently damned to hell for their ignorance as a result.

              If you have evidence for intelligent design, please share it with the rest of us. There is nothing intelligent about the way we were designed as the prevalence of bad backs attests. Human babies are now born prematurely because the developed head is too big for the newly upright pelvis. The list goes on. Any second-rate engineer could have done a better job.

              No scientist will 100% rule out the existence of a deity because there is a very small probability that one or the other may exist. The probability of evolution through natural selection is very much greater.

        • Follower of the church of the Spaghetti Monster says:

          Ahhhh you do know that religion is still a theory right….. hence has never been proven. You do also know that several religious theories out there oppose each other right?!

          • Anonymous says:

            I believe that the poster has already acknowledged that by stating that you could no more prove your theory to them than they could prove theirs to you.  And I am sorry but I could not resist chiming in, so…

            Ahhhhh you are aware that there are myriad scientific theories in opposition to eachother rght?

            Again the poster pointed that out by stating that there are several theories that refute evolution.  I did notice with interest that you made no attempt to refute that point in your response.

            I also can’t help but to point out that the poster spoke only as a Christian, so your point that religions differ is invalid because the poster never tried to say that all religions believed the same things.  However, it doesn’t matter because the fact that science and religion both have several different views on the same subject matter serves to prove that both are subject to man’s biases in his attempts to fnd truth.

        • Follower of the church of the Spaghetti Monster says:

          Quote "So basically if we are wrong then it won’t make a difference, but if we are right, you’re pretty much screwed."……. maybe you should look into Islam, Sikhism, Mormonism, Hinduism, Paganism and maybe even Scientology just to be sure that you’re not srewed when it comes to the day where your lights are turned off !!

        • Eva Loughsean says:

          Evolution has been proven many times by many experiments which cannot be explained any other way other than by natural selection and the impact of genes.  The word "theory" in English can apply to that which is unproven and still a postulate and that which has been proven by experimentation and observation.   But there is no point in debating with someone who believes in intelligent design which has no credible independent scientific support.

          I have read the Bible cover to cover.  The Danites slaughter of the peaceful farmers of the Laish was very enlightening and inspiring.  The firmament baffled me – why don’t planes and space shuttles crash through it when they are in the air?  And the Flood, I just wish there was some archaelogical evidence for it. 

          So I believe there was a spiritual teacher called Jesus approximately 2000 years ago.  I don’t think we have been saying he is like the Tooth Fairy or Santa Claus.  But there is nothing, nothing at all, in the Bible which even tries to make a credible case for the existence of God.

          • Lala Land says:

            Where are the religious freaks now?  Why are they not defending the firmament or the slaughter of the people of Laish?