By Trudy A. Martinez
There was another after-shock, besides the series of quakes in 1994 that left inhabitants running for open air in Los Angeles, that jolted society: The Bobbitt verdict: Not guilty by reason of insanity. The question to the jury was, “Was Jane justified or insane at the time she cut-off John’s penis?”
According to Jay Leno, the outcome has men fainting and asking: “Honey, want me to take out the trash?”
Genesis 2:24 speaks of a man and woman as “one flesh” and Matthew 5: 27-30 seemingly, justifies cutting off that part that offends. But this does not mean marriage gives Jane a license to cut John’s penis off. To think such is absurd.
Absurdity borders upon the relatively fashionable term of insanity which implies stupidity. The perception imparted by the Bobbitt verdict breeds nonsense
When a child does wrong, a parent punishes and instructs, holding him responsible for and accountable for his actions regardless of whether he knew those actions were wrong; this strategy is a necessary process that produces learned behavior.
Society accepts a similar parentage role. Ideally by the law of the land, society addresses the lawlessness of its’ citizens as a parent would a child.
However, the Bobbitt verdict prevails over justice. The decision forgoes the learning process, justifies stupidity, and grants non-responsibility; this in itself is an act of idiocy, nurturing more of the same.