BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 07 May 11 - 03:58 PM

I don't think revenge has been the motivation of the British penal system for some while, but there are a lingering few who fail to realise that it is impossible to run a judicial system according to gut reactions. I do feel, however, that the release of the two in question was premature. Their age at the time doesn't improve the nature of the crime, and by the time they were 18 they should have been old enough to understand the seriousness of it and why they should be in prison.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 May 11 - 05:37 AM

And, again, Jim, I accept your point to a degree also, re the fact that they were only 10; but must reiterate that I do not think that the actual time served begins to address the enormity of the offence in question at whatever age it might have been committed.

Any more comments on the concept of punishment as such, as requested in my last 2 posts

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 May 11 - 03:11 AM

Meant to say - only just noticed your response - can't speak for the rest - sorry.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 May 11 - 03:09 AM

"A bit of a drift, perhaps"
Not really - and I accept your point to a degree.
Our first instinct is punishment/revenge - from eye-for-an-eye to the grotesque ritual of trial-sentence-imprisonment-appeal-execution that was (and still is in parts of the world - I understand that some on Texas death rows have been there for up to thirty years) capital punishment.
Some of us, once we've had time to reflect, suggest that reform might be a better path and are willing to give it a go - I think that is what has happened to British society, and personally I welcome it.
But in the end, none of this alters the fact that these two were ten years old when they did what they did, and nobody here has even begun to approach the suggestion that they might just be monsters of our making.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 May 11 - 11:58 PM

So ~~ no-one anything to add directly on either the efficacy or the psychopatholagy of punishment as such?

Surprised.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 06 May 11 - 04:46 AM

As I have aid before, Jim: I regard punishment as a most negative concept. So do many people. But we have spent æons, from Socrates/Plato onwards, lucubrating & agonising over it without anyone, or any society, coming up with a better idea ~~ even do-gooding societies from Levellers to Quakers to Flower·children have retained the ultimate sanction of exclusion from the group for those who would not conform to the expected societal norms. 'Punishment' seems to be one of those reflex responses embedded in the human psyche; and even if one tries, or pretends, to prioritise the reformative & deterrent elements over those of revenge, there was in most breasts, however hidden, some feeling of satisfaction when a sadistic multi-murderer got the drop or a thug who had coshed an old lady for 6d got a dozen lashes. OK, so these last penalties have vanished from our system, and perhaps a good thing too; but I can understand by trying to apply a bit of empathy why some regret this. Honest now ~ can't you? Just a teeny-weeny itty-bitty bit?

A bit of a drift, perhaps; but I think this argument has been much prolepsised and canvassed on this thread already, so perhaps it can stay here and some might wish to respond in the more general terms I have rubricated, which seem to me to emerge naturally on this thread and not to over-broaden it.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 11 - 02:28 AM

"your implication that none of us knows anything about the case which would entitle us to state objections,"
I don't think I said this Mike - my reaction was to the definitive solutions being offered here - personally I accept neither executing (neither do you), nor banging away for life; the idea that you might lock two children/young men up in a secure unit alongside hardened adult criminals and then release them into the world at an unspecified date with all the skills and ideas they would have gained inside fills me with horror, especially after what they did.
I really don't think our system is constructed to cope with crimes like this, so you either go with the knee-jerk and punish them as adults (revenge), or leave it to the experts; not a great choice either way, but I can't think of another.
"adequately punished"
I find the the older I get, the less my desire for revenge on wrongdoers, especially young people, otherwise I would find myself permanently stationed in the lane outside our house with a half brick, waiting for the next ton-up boy-racer who uses this narrow road as a race-track and makes our lives a misery and it virtually impossible to let children out or keep domestic pets.
I feel we spent our lives (mine anyway) with a justice system heavily biased towards punishment and almost totally ignoring reform; things have changed and I'm willing to give it a go, especially with children and young teenagers.
I suppose that in the end it's down to whether you believe that these two are any different from any other child who commits a crime and thumbs their noses to the authorities because of their age; in my experience they all do it and despite the enormity and horror of their crime - I don't.
As far as press involvement is concerned, I long for the days when you could pick up a newspaper an read the news, even with an identifiable spin on it. Nowadays it takes me about a quarter-of-an-hour to read the news and the rest of the day doing the crossword.
Best back,
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 05 May 11 - 11:31 PM

Jim: yes indeed, I do share some of your doubts, in particular those re some of the suggestions made as to how these young people should have been disposed of. But I do not feel that what was ultimately done was right either ~~ certainly released too early, before they could have been thought of as adequately punished IMO; & what I was calling attention to was your implication that none of us knows anything about the case which would entitle us to state objections, and that to do so would make us all slavering *extreme-Mail-reading vengeance-seekers. I felt your statement "you can't pick and choose. - the alternative is trial by media" went too far to the other extreme.

Best

~Michael~

*I express it thus [no pun intended] because I think the Mail can often speak good sense representing some not-too-extreme middle-England views, & does not altogether deserve the obloquy many on this forum fling at it as a sort of reflex. Most of its journalistic standards are perfectly adequate imo.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 05 May 11 - 04:47 PM

Sorry, he died on Sunday, not today as I said above.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 05 May 11 - 04:45 PM

A ten year old boy shot and killed his Neo-Nazi father in America today.I doubt many will mourn his loss. God alone knows what this poor child must been subjected to.


http://uk.news.yahoo.com/boy-10-shoots-dead-neo-nazi-father-075358848.html

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 May 11 - 04:44 PM

Sorry Mike - have to disagree again
You can think your way into and out of all sorts of opinions and philosophies when you have plenty of facts at your fingetips. What you have here, as with the Mary Bell case, is extremely limited information on the case itself and its aftermath, and what little we do have is deeply tainted by a mob-rule press intent on selling newspapers via a call for revenge.
In those circumstances, and given the legal situation as it stands at the present time, I'm prepared to leave it to the experts, despite the doubts I have about the system.
I do have a fairl long-term interest in this case because of where it happened and particularly where Jamie Bulger came from - but I still feel I know far too little about it to take the definitive stance some people have here - vcan't help but notice you harbour some of the same doubts.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 05 May 11 - 04:32 PM

Not the only alternative, Jim: one can criticise the law; and if necessary take a stand against it. I suspect you would be more sympathetic to the activities of the Chartists, Militant Suffragettes, &c, than some others might. Some of the stands taken might be inappropriate ~ or worse, like those of that mulish fool josepp ~ but I cannot feel your last, somewhat cop-out, post quite consistent with the generality of your declared views & attitudes.

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 May 11 - 01:07 PM

The law has now dealt with them as it sees fit - you can't pick and choose. - the alternative is trial by media.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 05 May 11 - 01:02 PM

'The law' gave them life sentences, if I remember rightly. I have no problem with that.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 May 11 - 02:01 AM

"I expect you know best, Jim."
Until some of you come up with answers as to an alternative beyond lynching and banging them up indefinitly, we have to hope the law knows best - it's difficult to find trees with tough enough branches to take the weight of bodies around here.
Nice to know that another piece of news fodder has been put out of reach of 'The Daily Wail' and 'The Scum' Richie.
Any sign of that evidence yet - good job I didn't hold my breath??
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: kendall
Date: 04 May 11 - 07:20 PM

Silas, I suggested no such thing. Jeeez.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 04 May 11 - 06:16 PM

I expect you know best, Jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 04 May 11 - 06:15 PM

I see one of them back in the news tonight.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/breach-sees-child-killer-venables-id-144410826.html

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 May 11 - 06:10 PM

"It gives them an insight into how other people with kids might think. "
No it does not - families develop as small units, not communities and are totally defensive as to the behaviour of their own.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 04 May 11 - 05:46 PM

Gun and knife crime in the UK nowadays generally only gets reported when it involves innocent members of the public. Most people are oblivious to the full scale of it but the majority is confined to certain areas which are every bit as bad as anything the US has to offer. The strict controls we have on firearms licencing means there is a thriving market in illegal and unregistered weapons and they are fairly easy to acquire. I'm not sure whether that's a good or a bad thing, but it's certainly a mistake to underestimate the problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 04 May 11 - 01:15 PM

Kendall, honestly!

You think we should take knives away from these people and give them guns because it is better to be stabbed than shot?

Get real man. Knife crime in the UK is a problem, but nowhere near as big a problem as you may think, we still live in a country where a stabbing makes national headline news...

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: kendall
Date: 04 May 11 - 01:03 PM

Don't flatter yourself Silas, it's not about you or any other Brit who had nothing to do with the revolution.
I understand that there is a lot of knife crime in the UK. Would you rather be shot or stabbed? If the yobs had guns they would use them; they don't so they use knives.

Our Police carry guns not to protect us, but to protect themselves.
We carry guns because cops are too heavy.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 04 May 11 - 11:31 AM

Having kids doesn't give anybody a special insight or wisdom - it just makes them experts on changing shitty nappies.

It gives them an insight into how other people with kids might think.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 04 May 11 - 07:35 AM

Ahh ....right.

So, let me get this straight. Guns are not a problem.

There is a lot of guncrime in America, but it is all OUR fault here in the UK.

That makes sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: kendall
Date: 04 May 11 - 07:26 AM

Ralphie, our right to own guns is in the constitution. It is there because of the way the British government treated our colonists back in the 18th century. What started the shooting was when the red coats marched to Lexington and Concord to confiscate the farmer's rifles and powder.
At that time, rural America was a hostile place and without a gun you didn't live long.
Sure, that was then and this is now, but once it was written into the constitution it became part of our guaranteed rights and it takes 2/3 of congress to amend the constitution and get rid of that right. There are plenty of people who would do that today thinking if that right was removed from the bill of rights that crime would go away. Rubbish! Crooks, murderers, bank robbers would love to have a huge population of unarmed victims.

Guns are not the problem, attitude is the problem. How do you change attitude?
So, the gun problem can be traced back to our English roots. THEY are the ones who made that right necessary.
You may disagree or find fault but I answered your question.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Silas
Date: 04 May 11 - 06:22 AM

Nice one M!

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 04 May 11 - 06:20 AM

You think I need you?? I have my views and I don't give a damn who likes them--including you. ===

So commune with yourself, you boring little yobbo

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 May 11 - 03:46 AM

A couple of years ago we were told on the radio by American journalist Mary Ellen Synon, that it was the DUTY of every rural Irishman to carry a gun to protect their property and family.
The same journalist had earlier lost her contract with The Irish Times for describing Ireland's paraolympics (an annual sporting event for the disabled) as 'grotesque' - says everything that needs to be said really!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,Ralphie
Date: 04 May 11 - 02:53 AM

I was very scared by the part in the "Columbine" movie..."Hey, open a bank account with us, and we'll give you a rifle" How bonkers is that. What is it with you people in America, that you feel you have the right to own a gun?
In the rest of the civilised world, the owning of a gun is incredibly well monitored (as far as it can be).
In 56 years, I have never, knowingly, met anyone who owned a gun, and wouldn't be very happy about it, if I did. Yet, Americans seem to revel in it. The question I pose is ....Why?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 May 11 - 02:30 AM

"I guess we know who doesn't have kids."
Other than the suggestion that two ten-year-old children be either executed or locked up for life, there has been very little discussion on who is to blame for this horrific affair.
Doesn't it cross the minds of you hangers and floggers that if some people who have children had done their job in the first place and brought them up properly, we might not be having this discussion?
Having kids doesn't give anybody a special insight or wisdom - it just makes them experts on changing shitty nappies.   
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 04 May 11 - 12:19 AM

////Thank you for the clarification Josepp.
So if six is "too young" for you, then at what point in your view does a child eventually "know what they are doing", and why?////

I guess we know who doesn't have kids.

(That was said to me--so before you open you start complaining about how mean I am...)

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 04 May 11 - 12:14 AM

////There was a time when we deported them to the colonies, though I'm not wholly convinced that was a good idea either.////

That was how the world got saddled with Australia.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: kendall
Date: 03 May 11 - 04:04 PM

And the trees of Africa are still full of pre humans.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Smokey.
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:32 PM

There was a time when we deported them to the colonies, though I'm not wholly convinced that was a good idea either.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:12 PM

We had a case in Jonesboro, Arkansas where two boys--an 11-year-old and a 13-year-old--cold-bloodedly shot and killed several classmates and a teacher. They stole guns from one the boy's grandparents and took them on school grounds. One boy pulled the fire alarm and when the students filed out, they opened fire on them. I believe this was in '98.

Because of their age, they too received a slap on the wrist and both are now free. The difference is, neither was given a secret ID and protected by the govt. One was later arrested on weapons charges as a teen or young adult. I'm not sure what has since happened to the other. Nobody has tried to kill them or exact any revenge that I know of. They are as free as anyone else. But they are not protected. They have to live with the consequences of what they did. If someone kills them then someone kills them--boo-hoo.

Yes, I would have executed them on their 18th birthdays but that's just me. Why don't I go kill them now? Because I'm not the law. If I was, they'd be dead.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:11 PM

"Ain't y'all glad we don't carry guns over here?"

I sure am at that. As well as the fact we don't execute our citizens of course. Josepp seems to find views opposing state sponsored killing troubling, as such perhaps he's be happier in a third world country? He would get a lot more public fun of that kind (or so I've heard) in dusty places which lack basic sanitation and education.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:05 PM

When they abduct a helpless victim and torture him and murder him for no reason than to hurt him. If a 6-year-old can do that--he's guilty too. But most 6-year-olds can't. In the case of this boy, there's no evidence he tried to kill anybody. He took a gun to school because this is America where we LOVE guns. It happened again not long ago--a 9-year-old took a gun to school. It fell out of his backpack and discharged wounding another student. If America is willing to tolerate this for the sake of gun rights then fuck em. You get what you pay for.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:00 PM

Certainly brings them all out of the woodwork, doesn't it?
Ain't y'all glad we don't carry guns over here?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:56 PM

"he was 6--too young to know what he was doing. By 10, it's too late for that excuse."

Thank you for the clarification Josepp.
So if six is "too young" for you, then at what point in your view does a child eventually "know what they are doing", and why?

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:49 PM

////"He grew up in a crackhouse so he took a gun to school."So it was a premeditated act of killing then - after all, he took the weapon to school.////

Hey, if you want to execute him--go ahead. You have your view and I have mine. I don't care why he took the gun to school, he was 6--too young to know what he was doing. By 10, it's too late for that excuse. but if you want him execute him--fine with me--go ahead.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:46 PM

////Or so rude and unappreciative, for that matter ~~ I gave you about the sole support, tho conditional, that you have received on this thread, and regard your response as ungracious and abrupt and bumptious in the extreme.///

You're an idiot if you said what you did just to give me support. You think I need you?? I have my views and I don't give a damn who likes them--including you. I expect you to express what you feel regardless of whether it supports me or not--which I don't care if it does. get with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:43 PM

"He grew up in a crackhouse so he took a gun to school."

So it was a premeditated act of killing then - after all, he took the weapon to school.

"It was type of thing that happens in thousands of American homes every year--gun discharges and kills someone. Americans are willing to live with these types of killing in order to keep their gun rights"

How nice for you all..

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: josepp
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:38 PM

I'm well acquainted with the case it does not apply to Venables and Thompson. I have never believed that boy should have been imprisoned much less executed. He grew up in a crackhouse so he took a gun to school. The girl was shot and killed. Her uncle was on the news weeping blaming it on lack of prayer in the schools. She wasn't abducted and tortured by this boy. It was type of thing that happens in thousands of American homes every year--gun discharges and kills someone. Americans are willing to live with these types of killing in order to keep their gun rights so who am I to demand anything be done to this boy? He clearly didn't understand what he was doing. Venables and Thompson are a different story.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Penny S.
Date: 03 May 11 - 11:25 AM

I've just been watching Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" and part way through I was reminded of this thread. In Flint, a six year old girl had been shot by a six year old boy who had found a gun in his uncle's home, where he and his mother were living because they had been evicted. His mother had not seen him off to school because she was forced to travel a long way under Welfare to Work schemes, which she needed because the local employer, Lockheed Martin, had closed its plant.

The NRA turned up for a rally led by Charlton Heston, despite being asked not to go there, because it was a "free country" and they could go anywhere they wanted. Later, Heston would not answer Moore about why this had been done, claiming it was only coincidence, as was the rally at Columbine, and refusing to look at the picture of the girl.

It was, apparently, largely NRA members who wrote to the local law enforcers, demanding the killing of the six year old. And a lot of them. The officer concerned was appalled by this.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 11 - 05:10 AM

Not sure whether the whole of Europe has abandoned the barbarism of state killing - I think/hope it has, but it wasn't my intention to mislead - just a hurried seection.
The E.U. is a matter of opinion - curate's egg as far as I'm concerned; Ireland has done quite well out of it and, following the predatory big business/corrupt-and-inept-politicians made crisis, would be deep in the klarts had it not been for the bail-out.
Personally, I go along with Dave MacKenzie's Tweedledum - Tweedledee analysis - none of them ever bother consulting us chickens in the matter of who gets sent for the chop.
Regarding the not-quiet-late, not by any means lamented C.P., 87 countries is a giant step for civilisastion as far as I'm concerned - may its demise be swift and final.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Dave MacKenzie
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:42 AM

You make Brussels sound nearly as bad as Westminster.

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 May 11 - 03:33 AM

===All European countries have abandoned it and it is a condition of membership that it is not practiced.===

I am not so disingenuous as to pretend I don't know what you mean here, Jim. But a "European country" actually simply means one geographically situated in Europe, and "membership" doesn't come into it. If you refer to the EU or whatever the hell they call it these days as an alliance or trading-group or whatever the hell it is supposed to be these days, then membership is voluntary, and I am by no means the only person who thinks it was a grievous error ever to join & we can't get out too quickly ~~ not least because of the insistence of that organisation in sticking its long prodnose into our laws and legal systems. I realise that I am whistling down the wind in this particular, however ~~ more's the pity.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:58 AM

" Who are to dictate to me what a civilized country does or doesn't do?"
I don't ''dictate' what a civilised country does - that's what happens, an what has happened for a long tome - we got ourselves civilised.
Nor do I weigh the value of one individual's life against another; I was brought up to value all life and I believe the taking of any life is wrong - by individuals or by the state. The idea of killing someone because they have killed is a ludicrous contradiction and one of the reasons it was abandoned.
Another reason for abandoning it was the unreliability of reaching a guilty verdict - over the last 20 - odd years Britain has imprisoned over a dozen people for murder who have later been proven innocent.
Agree with you about one thing though - any nation that sanctions the killing of children is barbaric, and imprisoning them for a length of time before doing so, as in the US, is barbarians being barbaric.
"how many nations have now abandoned Capital Punishment?"
Lively -quick shufti -
87 countries have abandoned it altogether, 27 retain it but don't use it.
All European countries have abandoned it and it is a condition of membership that it is not practiced.
The main countries to use it are: Afghanistan, the Bahamas, China, Cuba, Egypt, India, Iran, Iraq, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, North and South Korea, Libya, Malaysia, Pakistan, Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Sudan, Syria, Thailand, Uganda, and Vietnam."
It is mostly to be found in Asia and Africa and the United States (in 38 states, the rest having totally abolished it).
The first country to abolish it was Venezuela in 1863; most recent was the Philippines in June of 2006.
Seems the world is moving in the right direction.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 May 11 - 02:36 AM

Indeed, josepp, were that scenario I outlined indeed the case then, as Lively said, I would pay for it thru my taxes. That is what citizens do, what taxes are for; and I am sure we all could find things we do not approve of our money going on, but we elect governments to make these decisions for us.

So don't be so naïf.

Or so rude and unappreciative, for that matter ~~ I gave you about the sole support, tho conditional, that you have received on this thread, and regard your response as ungracious and abrupt and bumptious in the extreme. You are coming over more & more as a peculiarly objectionable piece of work, I fear.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Bulger, Thompson, Venables
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 03 May 11 - 01:53 AM

As a matter of curiosity, I was wondering how many nations have now abandoned Capital Punishment (I'm assuming that all nations have used it in the past) and to what extent Capital Punishment continues to be carried out in religious nations compared to more secular nations?