California Woman's Body Identified, Husband Arrested


sorabji.com: Are there any news?: California Woman's Body Identified, Husband Arrested
THIS IS A READ-ONLY ARCHIVE FROM THE SORABJI.COM MESSAGE BOARDS (1995-2016).

By spunkydingo on Friday, April 18, 2003 - 10:33 pm:


By spunkydingo on Friday, April 18, 2003 - 10:36 pm:

    Sorry, this is the article that says "Prosecutors said Peterson was expected to be arraigned early next week and charged with capital murder. They said they would seek a special circumstance of double homicide, which could carry the death penalty upon conviction. However, they hadn't decided whether they would seek the death penalty."


By J on Saturday, April 19, 2003 - 11:25 am:

    Don't worry Spunky,he'll get the death penalty,they are just keeping the cards low for now.


By confusedspunky on Saturday, April 19, 2003 - 11:34 am:

    J, initially my point was the double hommicide issue.
    My view on the death penalty is changing.
    Maybe I support it in this instance. If the guy can be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt. Only a sadistic fuck would kill a woman with a baby in the womb.

    My point on the double hommicide has changed as well. After thinking about it, I realized that there is a difference between an abortion and murdering someone who has a baby in the womb.
    It is about choice.
    The mother did not choose to have the pregnancy terminated.

    That would be the difference.
    See, I worked it out myself!


By Platypus on Saturday, April 19, 2003 - 00:37 am:

    wasn't the baby already delivered? Hence, it=baby, not zygote?


By Nate on Saturday, April 19, 2003 - 01:34 am:

    i hear the umbilical cord was gnawed by wild dogs.


By Spider on Saturday, April 19, 2003 - 10:01 am:

    Trace, I think you were right to be confused.

    Man kills baby without mother's consent = not okay.

    Mother kills baby with her own consent = okay.


    Clear as dirt.


By spunky on Saturday, April 19, 2003 - 11:42 pm:

    Not ok to me, but ok to the state laws.
    The crux of abortion and murder and the death penalty all comes down to this.
    What do you hold more sacrosanct?
    The sanctity of life or the freedom of choice?
    Does your personal preference supersede the sanctity of life? Does personal choice enable you to make life & death decisions traditionally reserved for deities or nature, and taken without permission by murderers?
    You cannot treat "it" as both a "blob" and a life.
    You cannot charge one person with murder for destroying the same thing that is done hundreds of times a day in clinics. That would be hypocrisy.


By spunkydingo on Saturday, April 19, 2003 - 11:43 pm:

    You cannot have your cake and eat it too.


By Jesus on Saturday, April 19, 2003 - 00:55 pm:

    hey dumbass, they found the baby corpse a mile from the mommy corpse.

    who cares anyway? this chick was a crackwhore. her baby was going to be born all fucked up anyway. her husband was doing lines off some fresno whore's tits.

    some people just don't deserve to live.


By Bigkev on Saturday, April 19, 2003 - 04:35 pm:

    and you are the one who should decide that?

    fuckhead!!

    "do not be so swift to deal out death...even the very wise cannot see all ends." Gandalf - The Lord Of The Ring, J.R.R. Tolkien


By Rowlf on Saturday, April 19, 2003 - 05:16 pm:

    "The sanctity of life "

    trace, do you believe in the sanctity of life, or the sanctity of human life? do you care about the lives that have no bearing to you personally?


By wisper on Saturday, April 19, 2003 - 05:34 pm:

    "It is about choice.
    The mother did not choose to have the pregnancy terminated.
    That would be the difference.
    See, I worked it out myself!"


    good show, spunky.
    *nods*

    although i'd say that the crux of the death penalty is the many wrongly-accused people who die each year.


    in other news, i'm on my house-mates comp, and he has this poster up on his wall. Could there be more lense flares?
    "Hey! Tony! i think we need more lense flares on this poster!"


By spunky on Saturday, April 19, 2003 - 05:35 pm:

    No.
    Sometimes, ensuring the sanctity of life would include ending a life that has and will continue to violate other's sanctity of life.


By wisper on Saturday, April 19, 2003 - 05:37 pm:

    aak!
    someone has to tell people that lense flares do not = realism.
    my duty is clear now.

    wow, do i hate fakeass lense flares.


By eri on Saturday, April 19, 2003 - 09:14 pm:

    According to the info on a timeline of this that I saw last night, the mother was 8 months pregnant at the time of the dissapearance and that her body had decomposed and been eated by fish enough that the baby came out of the womb. They were found on the beach near each other but only the umbilical cord connected them.

    I think the whole thing is sick.

    I wonder about the motive of this murder, because the crime paints such an ugly picture in my mind that the reason for the murder (from his/her point of view) will probably be something simple and small and really lame.

    "I was having an affair and the bitch found out about it and was going to leave me, so she had to die" or some simplistic bullshit like that.

    I don't know why I feel this way about it. It's just a feeling I get, I don't know why.


By Rowlf on Sunday, April 20, 2003 - 11:28 am:

    "{No.
    Sometimes, ensuring the sanctity of life would include ending a life that has and will continue to violate other's sanctity of life."

    spunk, I dont think keeping em behind bars continues to violate other's sanctity of life, just my opinion...

    ...and... my father was killed by a drunk driver a few months before I was born, which really stings because I dont have any memories at all of him, and will never REALLY know what he was like.

    the fact that the man who was irresponsible and took my dads life also died in that car crash doesnt make me feel better. all it accomplished was that it made more grieving people...


By patrick on Sunday, April 20, 2003 - 01:50 pm:

    i think its fucking ridiculous that you fuckheads are speaking as if the husband is guilty.

    for someone who values the rule of law, you sure have discarded the 'innocent till proven guilty notion'.

    they said hundreds of people lined the street as he was brought in, shouting "murderer!" and "repent!" and other shit like that.

    disgraceful. fickle public. a shotgun blast to such a mob.


    you know if he was let go they'd hang him with no trial. the gruesome nature of the crime has most people assuming guilt.

    personally, i believe he had something to do with it however, i reserve most of my judgement until the facts are laid out.



By spunkydingo on Sunday, April 20, 2003 - 03:12 pm:

    I never said he was guilty.


By eri on Sunday, April 20, 2003 - 04:27 pm:

    I never said that he was guilty. I was just using that as an example since he is being so berated by the media.

    The lawyers said that it was pretty much an open and shut case, but they also said it was solely circumstantial evidence.

    I reserve my judgement until I have more facts.

    I think people shouting at him need to get a fucking clue. He is being crucified in the media so he is the easiest example I could think of when trying to show my feelings on how this was probably for a lame reason. I do not, though, know who it is and think that there should be facts as well as circumstantial evidence, though all physical evidence appears to be washed away.


By spunkydingo on Sunday, April 20, 2003 - 05:41 pm:

    "spunk, I dont think keeping em behind bars continues to violate other's sanctity of life, just my opinion... "

    Your point is a very valid one.
    And I have never suggested the death penalty for every murderer.
    There would have to be qualifiers.
    They would have to be at leaste 25 years of age,
    and meet 4 out of 5 of the following:
    1. More then one murder
    2. Absolute Proof.
    3. Criminal History.
    4. Have ability to understand right from wrong.
    5. The murder must be pre-meditated unless this is not the first act of "rage homicide".


By Rowlf on Sunday, April 20, 2003 - 08:50 pm:

    trace, what do you think about restrictions to the appeals process, or about keeping a closer eye on defenders to make sure they're doing their job?

    not trying to argue, just asking...


By eri on Sunday, April 20, 2003 - 09:06 pm:

    What do you mean by defenders? We are kinda confused on what you mean by that one.


By dave. on Sunday, April 20, 2003 - 09:22 pm:


By spunky on Sunday, April 20, 2003 - 09:32 pm:

    Appeals process?
    Only if new evidence or proof of mistrial surfaces.
    Then absolutely.
    As far as public defenders, they should come from local law firms who have local clientele.


By Rowlf on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 11:05 am:

    "As far as public defenders, they should come from local law firms who have local clientele"

    actually, I meant about keeping a close eye on how they handle their clients' cases, doing their best to defend them...


By eri on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 11:44 am:

    I understand what you mean Rowlf, but I think it goes both ways on that one. Both defense attorneys and prosecuting attorneys. There are many guilty people who walk free just as there are innocent people jailed. I don't know if taking away their personal rights in doing their job would be good, but at the same time the system is fucked in this regard for both sides.

    Spunky said that if they only used local attorneys then he thinks that they would work harder to protect their reputation there and that might aid in making sure a defendant gets the proper defense.

    He also thinks that public defenders should be paid by the hour for their work instead of a lump fee, because then they might have cause to work harder in defense of their client.

    I wish I personally knew more about evidence suppresion laws. I think that hurts cases more than it helps and it makes appeals difficult for innocent people. I just don't know enough about it to go on more than feelings based on what I have seen.

    Some of you know this, but Rowlf doesn't. I think that the whole system needs serious work. I mean, my sister didn't get off of her lazy ass to get representation, but got someone at the last minute to try to talk her into a plea. She gave that poor baby a skull fracture, an anurism on the brain, busted blood vessels in his eye, bruises all over his body in various stages of healing, a permanently deformed head, and neglected him to the point of a 6 week old baby when he was 7 months old. What did she get for her crime? 7 fucking days in a jail cell. She has to take parenting classes and see a psychiatrist and then when she has been financially stable for 6 months she can get him back to do it all over again! She should have had more. And she didn't have any kind of decent defense. She didn't have shit to help her really, and she didn't get shit still. Then again, I am an advocate against abuse when I can be. I find intentional harm of children in particular infuriating. I think that after what she did to her son and her actions since only affirming my beliefs about her, that she should never have contact with him again and should lose all rights to him, that she should spend real time in prison not jail, and that she should lose any other children she might have as soon as she gives birth to them. There is a chance that my parents might give Christopher back to them within the next two years. They are talking about it. They said that if anything ever happened to him again that they wouldn't be able to get him again and that they want him to go to his father's great-grandparents. They want that because they have money. When I told them I wouldn't stand for that and if anything ever happened to that baby boy again I would take him myself and raise him myself, they threw a huge bitch fit. Watch guys. In a couple of years I will be begging for money for the Christopher legal fund so that we can fight EVERYONE to get him.

    Sorry, that was totally off of the topic, but I think it sheds light on how I view the legal system.


By Rowlf on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 09:39 am:

    dont take this as me being argumentative, just asking (sensitive)

    do you think her case is actually representative of what happens to everyone else, or do you think that since she is a woman/mother/(white?) she got off light...

    do you think if she was black it would have made a difference? it makes a huge difference when it comes to drug cases...

    did she have a jury? Do you know anything about their process of jury selection before that particular case?




    anyways, even though spunky and I probably arent completely eye to eye on this one, I'm glad to see he's thought through this very throroughly, and his ideas for reform are good. They suggest a considerable amount of independent thought on this matter,

    I give it 0 Limbaugh heads out of 5. Good job.




By spunky on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 09:57 am:

    She did not need a jury.
    The court system wants to unload as many cases as possible due to financial reasons.

    They dumped intererest in Christopher's case as quickly as possible not because of improvement on Annie's part, but financial interests on the court's side.

    She has violated her parole on many occasions,
    but the defense lawyer (this time it was a private attorney paid for by Eri's folks) knew the judge, and with back slap from judge to attorney, annie was relieved of charges.


By Rowlf on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 10:23 am:

    "She has violated her parole on many occasions,
    but the defense lawyer (this time it was a private attorney paid for by Eri's folks) knew the judge, and with back slap from judge to attorney, annie was relieved of charges"

    i see. in that case wouldnt using local attorneys not be of help? if everyone knows each other and are friends, they might not care if they're not doing their job... kinda like when people get too chummy at the office. the papers gather dust and everyone plays minesweeper?


By J on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 11:19 pm:

    Well back in August a Chandler police officer shot a woman in the back as she was trying to pass a fake prescription at the Walgreens right down the street from me,she was trying to drive out of the pharmacy drive thru and he shot her in the back with her 18 month old baby in the backseat,he killed her.He's the first cop out here ever charged with murder,if the woman hadn't been white and the wife of a pilot I think he would have gotten away with it.When he goes to court he'll probably get off,the police union is backing him,even though she was no threat to him and he shot her in the back.


By Antigone on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 00:04 pm:

    That's what happens when you deify the police.


By Spider on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 00:14 pm:

    There's a nice palindrome for you, Antigone.

    D E I F I E D


By patrick on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 00:46 pm:

    dork.






    the Illinois moritorium on executions based on the questionability of so many death sentences based on DNA evidence, inequality in death penalty application, combined with the proven inequality of state-provided representation makes for more than enough reason to put the death penalty on hold everywhere because when you're playing god, you have to be absolutely sure.

    one innocent man killed at the state's hand is enough reason to, in my mind, stop the entire fucking process.


By eri on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 00:55 pm:

    I went to court with Annie that day. She planned to ask for a continuance based on the fact that she hadn't got herself an attorney at the time and was unable to prepare her defense. My parents begged me to do it so I took her for them. I got a babysitter for the kids that day (Thank God I did that) and took her.

    The fact that she was white had no bearing on the case whatsoever. There were many black (I don't mean this in a racist way) women there on similar charges and they all got offered the same plea bargain. It was 15 days served with 6 months probation, and they were required to have a psychiatric exam and take parenting classes. That's it.

    When we got there we found the prosecuting attorney (I had met all of them in Christopher's hearings and knew everyone involved in his case on a first name basis) and the family she was living with at the time this happened (they found him and called the police). I was trying to get the last information I needed in my mind to answer my question of my sisters guilt, and so I talked to them, and gave them updates on Christopher's health and let them see the pictures of him. I needed to see the other accused (a 13 year old girl). I needed to see her hands to see if they could have left the same size/shape marks on him, but they couldn't have so I knew it was my sister.

    When she asked for a continuance the judge asked her why in 9 months she had not secured an attorney and appointed someone in the courtroom already to help her and gave her an hour. The prosecutor gave him all of the information and pictures she had with her. We went outside of the courtroom to talk. There was no jury, but if she had contested the charges one would have been brought in. I don't know how they got the jury, but they would have come in if she plead not guilty. The trial would have been held on the spot. He looked at the evidence the prosecutor had against her and said that if she didn't plead guilty and they held a trial that he would not be able to get her as little time as was offered in the plea bargain. She was concerned with whether or not she would get to see her husband on Thanksgiving and this plea bargain made it so that she would get out on Thanksgiving Day. She took the plea bargain so that she would get out of jail in time to see Mike over the holiday. She didn't care about anything else, but seeing him. She is obsessed with him. She did have the guts to mouth off to the judge while deciding her sentence. She yelled at him because she already had a psychiatric evaluation and took parenting classes for the DFS and she didn't want to do it again, but he said it is part of the offer so she can take it and do it or stand trial.

    The biggest deciding factor in the last court case with her (involving Peter our family private attorney, and my dad's cousin) was that the officer of the court trying to show how she has repeatedly broken her rules of probation, told the judge that the way he runs his courtroom is a travesty to the laws it claims to uphold and that he is a corrupt judge who doesn't care what the laws themselves say. The judge got really pissed off at her and that is why he gave in to Peter's requests to have her work (parenting classes and psychiatric evaluation that she still hasn't done in 2 years) done at the base and not through the city work programs.

    Part of it was Peter knowing the judge (I have seen him get people off based on knowing the judge before, though they were typically insignificant things like traffic tickets) and part of it was the probation officer flying off the handle and talking to the judge the way that she did.

    Also DFS couldn't wait to get Christopher off of their financial books (they didn't pay my parents what they pay foster parents, but did pay for his health insurance) so they brought my parents back to court to try to get them guardianship of Christopher which puts all of the power of Christopher's future and when my sister gets him back into the hands of my parents who believe she never hurt Christopher and that it was the teenage girl. My parents are in serious denial when it comes to my sister, particularly my mother. We fight about this all of the time.

    I can honestly say that my sister was not treated any differently at all based on her race or age or anything like that. Sometimes I think that the judge was harder on her than he was to the black women, but I think that was due to my sisters mouth and her arguing with the judge. Either way, they all got the same sentence with just a misdemeanor on their record.

    My sister did get thrown back in jail once for a probation violation. She showed up to her very first probation hearing an hour and a half late. I happen to know it's because she overslept and wouldn't get her lazy ass out of bed, but she claims that she was driving around for 3 hours looking for it but couldn't find it. It's on the corner of 13th st and Main st downtown, any idiot can figure it out in a matter of minutes. My parents thought it was totally unfair that she had to go back in for like 2 weeks, but they're idiots sometimes. My sister has to learn that there are consequences for your actions. She has no clue of this concept. She doesn't feel she should have to pay for what she has done, because she couldn't help it.

    She's now talking and planning having another child. It scares the shit out of me. I don't have the money to fight for the children she might create and later hurt.

    What my sister did isn't a crime that I feel is insignificant (like getting busted with pot or driving too fast or things like that). What she did could have cost that innocent little boy his life. We tried to help her, but she didn't want to do anything other than what she wanted and my nephew paid the price for her selfishness. If it happens again, I don't know if he can survive it. I strongly feel that she should pay for her crime against her son. I think she got off way to goddamned easy. I think the system failed my nephew, both the courts and the Department of Family Services. When he is hurt next (and I don't doubt it will happen) my family will be torn apart, because I will fight every last one of them for the sake of this child. I will do everything in my power to take him myself and ensure they never see him again. I will stand up in a court room and swear on the bible and give them every last sordid detail of her fucked up psyche and how she has a long history of abusing things and drag her name through the mud. I won't care. My parents will disown me, I know that, and I will tell them that they aren't looking at what is best for Christopher, but what is best for Annie and their priorities are fucked up so if they don't like it then they can all kiss my ass goodbye. It's coming. I know it is. Christopher will end up paying the price in the end. I just hope that he survives whatever she does next. After all, my parents leave her alone with him for weekends now. No supervision whatsoever. I have seen them do it and watched that baby boy cry for an hour straight because she won't take care of him. It's hard to step back and decide whether or not to help the child knowing that it only makes it so that she doesn't have to care for the child she gave birth to, but expects to get back soon.

    The whole situation is fucked up and it is Christopher who has been failed.


By Rowlf on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 01:06 pm:

    WARNING: watch out because I'm all over the place here:



    "one innocent man killed at the state's hand is enough reason to, in my mind, stop the entire fucking process"

    one innocent man is horrible, but on the other hand, if society decides that its appropriate, there should be consideration (note i said consideration) for a 'reasonable number' based on certain cases...

    just like several other things like prohibition, abortion, etc., it sounds harsh but in society the 'you gotta crack a few eggs' idea is worthy of consideration, compromise. If a state wants capital punishment really bad you have to listen to the people and work with them... sometimes people die in order to maintain the rights of others, it happens. Its one of the same arguments people use to look past thousands of dead Iraqis.

    I prefer that if that has to happen it be an accident from an irresponsible member of the public instead of coming from a government, which is why I'd have to say that capital punishment needs to be stopped until it becomes "fool-proof" - any doubts, ANY doubts, no matter how severe the accusations or what the media or public would want, and you do NOT seek the death penalty... coming up with punishment options should not occur until after the case is decided... maybe one trial to determine guilt/innocence and another deciding a level of guilt, how clear that guilt is, actually acknowledging any evidence that wasn't brought up in the previous trial for various reasons... instead of the black/white thing. Noone should die because of courtroom technicalities.

    then theres the vigilante argument.. "you want this guy dead so bad? you go get him yourself, and you deal with the consequences"

    spunky, I dont know if you're actually religious or not, but does religion influence your ideas about capital punishment? eye for an eye, tooth for tooth?

    I was just thinking today about how in the United States you can't get elected unless you make it clear to the public that you are religious... that disturbs me. The only person who I've ever heard say anything against religion is Jesse Ventura.


By Rowlf on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 01:16 pm:

    eri, do you think that maybe abuse is so common that they dont care anymore? even child abuse?

    I know you think its worse because its a child, but I generally think abuse is abuse, even if someone cant defend themselves...

    if it is a matter of abuse becoming so common, the court overlooks it because it doesnt shock them. I know its common enough that horrible as your description is it doesnt shock me at all. Most abusers get off easy if the court thinks it wont happen again. Ditto drunk drivers, and they're endangering lives. Did the court treat this case like a one-off incident, wont happen again - or did they treat her as the person you say she is


By eri on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 01:17 pm:

    Spunky isn't particularly religious. We don't go to church. We do discuss it sometimes, but he is not a man who lets religion effect his views on things. He makes up his mind for himself.

    I am a lot more religious that he is, or at least spiritual, in the aspect that I study it and practice it in my own life, but I try to make my decisions not based on religion at all.

    Though I do doubt that all of my beliefs or morals haven't been effected by religious teachings at some point in my life, religion isn't my deciding factor. Then again the religion I do practice is one that no political candidate would announce they practiced, because the christians would freak.


By kazoo on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 01:22 pm:

    She's a witch!!!!!
    BUUUUUUURN HER!!!!!!!




By Rowlf on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 01:31 pm:

    fo'sheazy?


By eri on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 01:56 pm:

    Cute Kazoo. I will admit to being a bitch, but not sure about witch. Close though.

    I do often find myself thinking "an it harm none, do as ye will" and then thinking "God, I need to stop watching these damned movies".


By kazoo on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 01:59 pm:

    What is the religion you practice? If and when we hang out, remind me to bring my tarot cards and we'll do a spread for you.


By eri on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 02:17 pm:

    S did a spread for me this weekend. In fact, she bought me my first set of tarot cards as my birthday present. Apparently I am supposed to be a teacher and healer, which I didn't see for myself, but I find I am constantly drawn to those things.

    Right now I am studying mostly, but meditating and practicing Wicca/Paganism. I am still learning a lot. I have found though, that my beliefs tend to follow with Wicca, though I am not sure which kind yet. This is all still pretty new to me.

    It is amazing the people I have met and the amazing things I have been invited to. It's almost a shame that we are going to be moving in that aspect. I am worried about Montgomery, that I won't be able to learn or practice as easily there.

    I did hear it is only about a two hour drive from Atlanta, though, so it will be realtively easy for us to get together, after this summer.


By kazoo on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 02:26 pm:

    Which deck did she get for you?


By kazoo on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 02:38 pm:


By spunky on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 03:02 pm:

    Hmmmm
    Religion. My views for religion should be reserved for another thread.
    Religion should not have a place in criminal justice.


By eri on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 03:09 pm:

    That article...things that make you go hmmmmm.

    She got me "The Medicine Woman" set with the deck and book. It is pretty shamanistic, in fact completley shamanistic. As I was looking through the different sets and cards available, I was looking for something that was easy for me to understand, that kinda, just didn't seem difficult to understand. I looked through all kinds of them for about an hour and then just picked this one up and the language was familiar and comfortable and it was relatively easy to understand. Funny how I am always drawn to things that show the role of the medicine woman.

    Doing the readings was totally fun. I am looking forward to learning more.


By Spider on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 03:17 pm:

    Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but this is freaking me out.

    My religious beliefs are inextricable from the rest of my being. They inform every decision I make, big and small, because they involve the way I see the world and the order I see behind everything, and the fact that human beings have souls and have dignity just by nature of existing.

    I often act (and vote) against my beliefs (i.e., voting for Ralph Nader, who is pro-choice), but I never ignore them entirely.

    I was really bratty this weekend and unkind to my mother (actions very much opposed to my beliefs), and I felt like I was out of control......but immediately afterwards I was conscious of violating the code of behavior I believe in, and I felt terrible and apologized.

    So, it's very possible to believe in one thing and live in another way, but to my way of thinking, you do that by accident, by not having presence of mind at the moment.

    I can't conceive of a way of living in which you have your beliefs over here, but you act out your daily life in this way over here. Even the Crusaders and Inquisitors thought they were obeying the will of God and acted according to their beliefs.

    Otherwise, you get into "splitting" and the Nazi Doctor phenomenon, and your personality disintegrates.



    Unless you're talking about just blindly following the leaders of your church and letting them make your decisions for you. ("The Pope is against abortion, therefore I am, period.") That's just dumb. But then, those wouldn't be *your* beliefs, in the first place -- those are the beliefs of your leaders.




By eri on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 03:27 pm:

    I think the difference is separating my personal beliefs from that of the churches I have been to in the past. My beliefs are based on what I have learned in the past, but not only religion, also experience, and gut feelings and many other things contribute to my beliefs, which is not religion alone.

    I don't make my political decisions be influenced by a church, but by my personal beliefs which are a combination of many things. I am sure religion sometimes influences part of it but there is more to it than just that.

    I got tired of being looked down upon for not following along with beliefs of the churches like sheep. I found myself feeling like there was something wrong with me because I felt something or believed something different. I got tired of not getting answers to my spritual questions but simply get told that I had to give it up to God "I am the power and the light, whosoever believes in me, blah blah blah".

    Religion itself isn't my influence in my decisions, because it is only ONE part of who I am and what I believe. I make my decisions based on thought and meditation and intuition, and only one small portion of that is influenced by religion.


By Spider on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 03:32 pm:

    OK, that makes more sense. I was having visions of people believing in one thing and acting in the complete opposite way, like believing in the inherent dignity of human life and then sentencing 30 prisoners to die.


By eri on Monday, April 21, 2003 - 03:40 pm:

    No, not at all. I do my best to act in accord with my beliefs. I just let them be influenced by more than religion as in the church. What you described above about how you make your decisions, it is a lot like me, but I don't give religion the credit for my belief system and count it only as one factor.

    Geez. I am weird.


By Lapis on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 11:38 am:

    I've been discussing religion lately at work, actually agreeing with some of the people who are very Christian on various points which has been somewhat surprising.

    Tarot cards are wonderful. Some people I know say that they're evil, the work of the devil, etc. but what they don't seem to understand that the cards don't tell a definite future-- they're a tool to help focus your energies. They don't make anything happen-- you do.

    I always assumed that you were Presbyterian or something, Eri, maybe because of Spunky. I'm glad you're not.


By patrick on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 01:56 am:

    the presby's have killer potlucks though...up there with them baptists.


By Spider on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 09:38 am:

    Yeah, I can vouch for that. I grew up next door to a Presbyterian minister and his family -- they held a lot of picnics. Really nice people, too.


By patrick on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 12:57 pm:

    presbys are of the Mr. Rogers breed...if Im not mistaken. He was a Presby minister right?

    My family belonged to a Presby church for a while. I went to a bit of Sunday school, preschool and the occasional easter service. all really mellow people that appeared to me, at such an age, more about hanging out and being comfortable than chilling the spirit of god in you like the baptists do.

    my dad's parents were devoted souther baptists. their church was icy. i cried like a motherfucker whenever my dad, on the weekends i was with him, tried to dump me in the sunday school when he went upstairs for the regular sermon. i hated it. it smelled musty. the kids were zombies. the old marble facade church was just wrong. the old women grunted in their buster browns...the baked beans had onions in them and potato salad had egg in it and they used white bread.


By eri on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 02:40 pm:

    I was actually a baptist for the longest time. This change has been coming for a while, but I tried to deny it cuz of the "fear" surrounding it. Finally I decided to go and get some books, and then I went to a workshop, and then to PNO (Pagans Night Out). I am actually more at peace with my spirituality then I have been in a very long time and for the first time in my life I don't question what I believe, but rather, how people will react to it. I have been pleasantly suprised so far, though. Enjoying it.

    I figured that I could use the cards to help guide me in meditation and things like that. The very first reading I ever did and it was pretty damned on target, almost eerily. It was kinda cool. Same with the reading that S did on me, though I am confused about one thing on it, guess I don't quite understand it yet, but I will get there.


By J on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 03:08 pm:

    I like eggs in potato salad,but I was raised Southern Baptist and all that talk of burning in hell really put me off. I still have my new testament bible with my name in gold letters from when I learned my verses in sunday school,used to be white,it's yellow now.


By eri on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 03:23 pm:

    I still have all of my old bibles, too. And my grandmother's bibles. There was a lot that turned me off about southern baptist, and catholicism (no offense to the catholics in the house).

    I have yet to find a potato salad that I like, but I am really picky about that stuff.


By Spider on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 03:28 pm:

    Catholics aren't known for their interest in the bible, curiously enough. No lay Catholic I know can quote lines from the bible and give you chapter and verse numbers.......my born-again uncles, aunts, and cousins can, though.


By eri on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 03:44 pm:

    When I was in Catholic school we were required to memorize a certain verse from the bible and had to write it EXACTLY as it appeared in the bible, letter for letter, punctuation mark for punctuation mark. If we put a comma instead of a semi colon we failed the test. We had to do this once a week every single week. I don't remember a single one of them now.

    My mother in law can quote any part of the bible she wants off of the top of her head and twist it's meaning to whatever she wants. Frankly I think she is crazy as hell. She didn't like the fact that I had sponges "baby killer sponges" in my kitchen and threw them all out and replaced them with stainless steel scrubbing things with soap in the middle (can't remember what they are called) not caring that I am allergic to that soap in them. She also threw away my T-Fal collection of pots and pans that I got as a wedding gift from my cousin. When she found out I was upset about her going through my stuff and throwing it away, she sent me a letter calling me a spoiled little child who was throwing a hissy fit and included some quote from the bible about people committing suicide and said she won't let me kill her son and granddaughter with my "baby killer sponges" or by giving them food poisoning from possible scratches in my pots and pans. She's a freak. Born again psycho.

    I just finally decided to find my own path, that fit me. That wasn't based on some guy standing on an altar telling me what to think, but instead deciding what to think myself.


By spunky on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 04:06 pm:


By eri on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 04:22 pm:

    Woo Hoo, you found the dead sea scrolls! Thank You honey!


By eri on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 04:25 pm:

    Wait a minute, it is missing some of the gospels of the dead sea scrolls, and is only the ones that this group feels "important enough" not to be left behind. Damnit. My luck.


By semillama on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 06:56 pm:

    Baby killer Sponges? For a minute I thought you were talking about a different sort of sponge...


By eri on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 07:12 pm:

    Nope, just my kitchen sponges and scrubbers I use to clean. The baby killer sponges thing will annoy me to the day I die, I swear. Nothing like coming home from the hospital after a near death experience and having to leave your baby in the hospital to walk in the door and find this crap.


By wisper on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 07:23 pm:

    "For a minute I thought you were talking about a different sort of sponge..."

    so did i. I mean, at first i wondered why you would keep your birth control in your kitchen (oh, you saucy southerners!), but at least that makes more sence that the real story.

    And why T-Fal? T-Fal is the shit.

    Last night i was feeling very troubled about something, and i was just a mess of frustration, trying to sleep but only able to cry.
    I remembered how much prayer used to help me to feel better when i was younger, in similar times, so i put my hands together like i always did. And remembered that i have nothing to pray to.
    I remembered my old rosary, and if i was really REALLY fucked up about something i'd sit quiet and do the whole damn thing, and by the end feel much better and calmer and clear-headed and all that.
    Remembering these things just makes me furious now.

    So i prayed to the nothing. Like usual i wrapped the idea of nothing around me like a warm black blanket, and prayed like a radio in the middle of an empty feild on another planet.
    Nothing listened. Nothing heard me.
    Nothing will happen.
    This is more comforting than 1000 hail marys ever was.


By Nate on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 07:29 pm:

    fuck t-fal. fuck non-stick pans. motherfuckers afraid of butter or something?


By eri on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 07:39 pm:

    They said that if there are scratches in the non-stick pans then when you cook on them you release chemicals in the pans that cause you to die of food poisoning. Fucking idiots. I loved my T-Fal and have none of it left. My mom actually went out there and dug through the trash to try to rescue it and brought it back to her place and cleaned up what she could but like one month after the rescue attempts they handles and shit started falling off and they just fell apart.

    I had the entire T-Fal Saphire collection. I registered for it but never dreamed anyone would spend $250 on a wedding gift. I was shocked and amazed and in total heaven when Peter and Marlene gave me that for my wedding gift. Peter teamed up with all of his brothers and sisters (many of whom didn't even know me) to get me exactly what I registered for at this super pricey store. The whole gesture was awesome.

    I loved that T-Fal set and now it's gone. I mean it was the shit. It was the best pots and pans I will probably ever own. It rocked. But it also had sentimental value, cuz of everything Peter did, even though I was a stupid kid and he hardly knew me.

    I fucking miss my T-Fal. Nothing has come close to it since.


By patrick on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 07:50 pm:

    i have no idea what t-fal is.

    we have some nifty calphlon pots and pans, i like calphlon.


By Nate on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 08:50 pm:

    mine are all-clad. stainless steel cook surfaces. i love them.


By spunky on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 09:07 pm:


By spunky on Tuesday, April 22, 2003 - 09:07 pm:


By Platypus on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 01:40 am:

    *mutters indistinctly through a mouthful of split pea soup*

    cast iron is where it's at.


By dave. on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 02:59 am:

    yup.


By Nate on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 01:13 pm:

    cast iron my fucking ass. especially ESPECIALLY for a vegetarian, who is more likely to use unsaturated fats. nothing fills up them free slots in unsaturated fat molecules faster than iron.


By wisper on Wednesday, April 23, 2003 - 07:17 pm:

    i like using butter AND a non-stick pan, it makes me feel extra special.
    And clean up is a snap!


bbs.sorabji.com
 

The Stalking Post: General goddam chit-chat Every 3 seconds: Sex . Can men and women just be friends? . Dreamland . Insomnia . Are you stoned? . What are you eating? I need advice: Can you help? . Reasons to be cheerful . Days and nights . Words . Are there any news? Wishful thinking: Have you ever... . I wish you were... . Why I oughta... Is it art?: This question seems to come up quite often around here. Weeds: Things that, if erased from our cultural memory forever, would be no great loss Surfwatch: Where did you go on the 'net today? What are you listening to?: Worst music you've ever heard . What song or tune is going through your head right now? . Obscure composers . Obscure Jazz, 1890-1950 . Whatever, whenever General Questions: Do you have any regrets? . Who are you? . Where are you? . What are you doing here? . What have you done? . Why did you do it? . What have you failed to do? . What are you wearing? . What do you want? . How do you do? . What do you want to do today? . Are you stupid? Specific Questions: What is the cruelest thing you ever did? . Have you ever been lonely? . Have you ever gone hungry? . Are you pissed off? . When is the last time you had sex? . What does it look like where you are? . What are you afraid of? . Do you love me? . What is your definition of Heaven? . What is your definition of Hell? Movies: Last movie you saw . Worst movie you ever saw . Best movie you ever saw Reading: Best book you've ever read . Worst book you've ever read . Last book you read Drunken ramblings: uiphgy8 hxbjf.bklf ghw789- bncgjkvhnqwb=8[ . Payphones: Payphone Project BBS
 

sorabji.com . torturechamber . px.sorabji.com . receipts . contact