Recently, there was a news story about a woman who faced a felony charge of squirting breast milk into the face of a deputy law enforcement officer.
The woman, from Kentucky, was arrested for public intoxication. As she was changing into an inmate uniform after her arrest, she squirted a stream of breast milk into the face of the female deputy watching over her.
In the press release from the Kentucky Detention Center, the deputy de-contaminated herself from the “bio-hazard” and the woman was charged with third-degree assault.
The original charge, public drunkenness, was merely a misdemeanor offense; the assault is a felony charge and a $10,000 bond was set.
Of course, the media picked this up, and everyone chuckled at the story. People are debating about whether using breast milk as a weapon should constitute a felony assault case, and there are plenty of laughs going around.
The deputy, however, is not laughing.
She has to go through months of testing and waiting to see if she has contracted the HIV virus.
Sadly (and stupidly, I think), we can’t legally test the inmate immediately for HIV – some nonsense about privacy. We have to let the deputy wait, wonder, and worry. That’s simply not compassionate and certainly not fair.
That this inmate is drunk as a mother seems bad enough, but to intentionally squirt her bodily fluid into someone else’s face has the intent to humiliate or harm.
A felony charge is appropriate.
And that baby needs a better mother.TrackBack URI
During his recent African trip, Pope Benedict XVI said that the distribution of condoms would not resolve the AIDS problem. The Pope has made it clear that abstinence is going to be the best way to fight AIDS.
Google “Pope” and “condoms,” and you’ll never run out of reading material excoriating the man for his observation and opinion. Many health advocates have gone ballistic in their criticism of his comments. They feel it is one thing to promote abstinence as part of the Catholic religion, but that it is an entirely different thing to preach it to the world.
On a person-by-person basis, wearing a condom does, of course, offer some protection against contracting various venereal diseases and (of course) unwanted pregnancy. It is also true that condoms sometimes break, slip, or are put on incorrectly (taut to the very end). Everything has its limitations…except abstinence.
I remember listening to a rabbi describing a situation that occurred to his kosher family. His 7 year old child was invited to a birthday party for a classmate at one of those fast-food hamburger establishments. When he came to pick up his child at the end of the party, one of the mothers – clearly annoyed – chastised him for the pain he caused his son. “All the children had hamburgers, chicken nuggets, french fries and dessert, and your little boy had to sit there and eat none of it. Imagine how terrible your son must have felt? How could you do this to him? Food is food. There is nothing sinful about food. What you are doing to him is just cruel.” Just about at the end of her tirade, his son bounded up to him, gave him a huge hug around the waist, and said “I had a great time. This was a fun party.”
The woman blanched and walked away. The rabbi followed her and gently told her the following: animals will eat whatever is around, even if it will make them unhealthy. Humans are to rise above animals and become masters of their urges. Imagine my son in a dorm room where harmful illicit drugs are being passed about. We already know that peer pressure and urges will not force him to relent and give in to the impulse. Learning at his early age to control impulse and desire is not a harmful trait – many times, it might be a life-saving one. Look at him. He enjoyed the company of your son and the rest of the children without giving up his values. He looks happy and satisfied. We really need to bring up our children to be masters of their instincts, not slaves to them, don’t you think?
The woman scowled, but listened to him.
Yes, in any one instance, a condom could protect, but in the overall scheme of humanity, why do so many people wish to push away the enormous protective power of moral values?
When the Pope suggests that human beings are best off saving their sexual passion for the stability of a covenant of marriage, he is making a statement that the act of sexuality is elevated by the context, and ultimately protects both man and woman from a myriad of hurtful consequences from venereal diseases to unwanted pregnancies (complete with abortions, abandonment, single-parenthood, and homelessness to name a few).
The naysayers all have one thing in common: they refuse to want, believe or accept that human beings can commit to a higher spiritual state of thought and behavior. The Pope believes in us more than that.
I am not Catholic, so this is no knee-jerk defense of my spiritual leader. The truth is that he is simply correct and too many people don’t want to hear it, because they want to live lives unfettered by rules. It is sad that they don’t realize that this makes them a slave to animal impulse versus a master of human potential.TrackBack URI