Marco started his return home programme about three months ago, and things seemed to be all right, even if he did not get along well with his mother. Sometimes we went and pick him up in Tuscania, otherwise he came home on his own by train from Civitavecchia.
On the train he met some boys who commute from Latina to Rome to go to university. I think this is something positive, because being away from home for two years he lost his contacts from school and when he is at home he does not have much to do.
We realised that Marco’s readjustment could have been a problem.
The best thing for him was to attend a training course, so he could start working after two or three years, but he insisted on going back to High School.
Not aware of his condition he did not understand how things are, he had his own ideas about school, he thought he just needed to attend.
I tried to explain in every possible way that school was not what he thought that he needed to study with perseverance and he had to make sacrifices, but he does not seem to listen.
My wife and I often argued on this topic, she accused me of being too permissive and tolerant, that I was being fooled, and then we were at daggers drawn. She was probably right as she knows him better than me. I cannot see any other way rather than being indulgent and give in, just to keep him busy and have the chance to make friends at school. The alternative would have been a direct confrontation, which we previously experienced and he ended up in the therapeutic community.
Another week was left to complete the programme and then he could be definitely at home. One evening at dinner he revealed something shocking to us.
We had just finished dinner and I noticed a sort of restlessness in his behaviour.
Suddenly we went all quiet. My wife was washing the pot and dropped it in the sink. I was petrified and it took me a few seconds to grasp what he said.
Are you sure? When did you find out?
"I already had a feeling I was gay, and the friends I met on the train confirmed it, and they suggested me to tell you, they are also gay.
Marco you are going through a very peculiar period, you can be easily influenced. You probably convinced yourself you are gay, just to please them and be their friends.
I think that being gay is not something you acquire by birth, but it is a mental attitude, and I also believe that being gay is a conscious or unconscious choice and not a DNA factor.
“Well right now this is the way I feel, I have nothing against women, but I am not particularly attracted to them.”
Anyway you should know that most of the people around you will give you a hard time, and you will have more problems than the ones you already have. Think it over now that you are going back to the therapeutic community, and perhaps deep down inside yourself and you may change idea. In any case given the fact that you insist on going back to school, despite your conditions and your mom’s disagreement I am trying to find a small apartment in Latina. The area where we live in not well served and I cannot take you to school every morning because I am often away for work.
I tried to change the subject waiting for him to go out with his new friends, and discuss the situation at a later stage.
“That is all we need right now, I always told you that he does whatever he wants, without even thinking of the consequences of his behaviour”.
I am sorry… I am so mad that I would like him to get out of this house, so he would be left alone to himself.
“Don’t overreact, there are many gay people around, it was ok for you before, now that we are affected personally the situation changes, especially for you that are a man”.
You know me I am not embarrassed by the fact that sooner or later I’ll have to tell my colleagues or friends, but by the fact it literally makes me sick to imagine any type of intimate relationship between me and another man. Off the records… they don’t know what them miss.
I see, but you cannot expect other people to have the same sexual attitudes as you have”.
Well it seems something unnatural, at the end of the day the purpose of sex is to procreate, if it also a source of pleasure it is a separate subject.
“Why are you so bothered by that?”
I am embarrassed and nervous, oddly enough it feels like a threat. In fact if I think about it, it is like a personal threat, an instinctive, anthropological matter. In the worst case scenario if 90% of the population became gay or lesbian it would be likely to lead to the destruction of our species.
“What a nonsense, what kind of example is that? How absurd!”
It is absurd but it is not a nonsense. If the example of 90% of gay people was real, it would be a logical and not far-fetched consequence.
If I think that homosexuals, gay organisations underestimated this instinctive and anthropological feature. From their point of view they cannot understand why people are opposed to them and cannot bear them.
People consciously or unconsciously feel this as a threat to their survival. I am aware it sounds surreal but this is the way I see it.
To make things worse they often speak about gay/lesbian marriage. I have nothing against a union between two men or two women. It is a choice I respect and I understand the need of legally regulating these unions, but when they speak of marriage I cannot understand.
Some years ago on TV I saw two representatives of the gay community. They spoke about marriage and suggested the indissolubility of gay marriage. It is the usual trick of distorted and inappropriate use of terms: “marriage” unequivocally identifies the union of a man and a woman.
I do not understand why these people want to fool themselves denying the evidence.
It is much simpler to make up another word i.e. “homounion”. I think that very few people – a part from Taliban of morals and ethics – would be opposed to gay marriage legal recognition which would have administrative effects but this type of union would have nothing to do with marriage.
I do not mean to rub salt in the wound, but whoever refers to gay pride should also abhor gay marriage in favour of this new type of homounion. These people should find marriage repulsive as much as I find homounion repulsive
“I see, but many of them feel like women in many, respect. They have plastic surgery, they are castrated to create an opening, said bluntly something that could act like the female organ.
You said it right, they feel like women, but – the harsh truth is – they are not!
I can also feel immortal but it is as sure as the sun rises I am not immortal. I repeat myself I cannot make out why they are fooling themselves in such a blatant way. Anyway if they are happy believing that I am glad for them. Unfortunately for us we are not like groupers that are born female and then turn into males.
Hats off to those who for personal reasons or believes have the courage to challenge millions of years of human species evolution, experimenting forms of unions which – whether we like it or not are “unnatural”.
It is true that homosexuality has always existed, but it has never been a material part of human nature. In the past it was perhaps more widespread than now, it was almost considered something normal.
Many illustrious men had a wife, mistresses, sons and various “eromenos”, but to my knowledge they never theorised marriage between two persons of the same sex. I fully understand that if there is a deep relationship between two persons of the same sex it could also lead to a physical union which has anyway nothing to do with marriage. Personally, and I am not ironic I am very grateful to them for their contribution to birth control, given the irresponsibility and the short-sighting of the vast majority of the world’s political and spiritual leaders towards this issue.
We have to thank fundamentalist gays who consciously or unconsciously are serving Nature to contain demographic growth.
“Now you are crossing the line! You are assuming that the growing number of gay unions could be a mechanism put in place by Nature to control births”.
To tell you the truth I never thought of that, I simply noticed a practical consequence referred to this type of unions in relation to a problem, it would be useful to take a deeper insight at these interconnections and interdependencies.
"I see you've calmed down."
Yes I have. I realise that the unknown is what we fear and worry about, especially if the unknown is classified as sin by common morals.
In my own way, even if superficially I began to examine the issue and I just needed a bit of understanding in order to dispel fear.
I only hope Marco will not become a fundamentalist gay and he will be able to get back to heterosexual condition, then if he wants to have homosexual relationships…. He may like that, I will not, but at the end of the day, that is his life.
JUSTICE AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE
The solution we thought about, I mean. the apartment in Latina seemed to be working and Marco went back to school, he could come home with his friends when he wanted, and normally he did that once a week.
This meant extra costs for me, but fortunately I could afford it. I was worried if at the time his horizon was limited to the gay universe. He was always distracted, disorganised, with no sense of proportion, he constantly justified himself saying…I did not do it on purpose and that made my wife go mad.
She never missed the chance to remind me that my good-natured and tolerant behaviour towards him made things worse.
We often had arguments on this matter and he seemed to have a particular ability to trigger those rows.
One night his motorcycle was stolen, it was parked out of the house.
He is careless but he is also unlucky. I had never had anything stolen.
I tend to trust people and I took my time before I bought a safety chain.
I felt very bad and I found out things about myself I could never imagined.
If I could have caught the thief I would have beaten him up and I started to appreciate some Islamic countries customs to sort out this problem.
Is it your first theft? Good, if you are caught you repair the damage…I’ll chop your hand off and after hospitalisation and loving cares paid by the Government, you are free again.
It is unlikely the thief does it a third time, in that case I’ll cut the other hand off, so the problem is sorted out for him and the community.
“I am surprised! You non-violent and radical, you always say it is much better to persuade than to impose, you would like to introduce the old law Eye for an eye, Tooth for a Tooth?”.
The temptation is great, perhaps I am so upset, but this is a serious issue. Don’t steal is even one of the ten commandments, but since I was born I have never heard a Pope’s Angelus mentioning a word on the subject.
The worst that can happen to a thief is that he can spend two months in jail, after he can quietly start again.
“I know that punishments for this type of crime are derisory, I am sure that if a thief knew that he could end up in jail for 5 years, he could think it over before doing anything. The problem is that jails could get overcrowded, and new jails would be needed. Hand cutting is more effective and would not increase costs charged to the community”.
Well…if such concept were approved in Italy we would be considered the butchers’ of the West. Hand cutting is a sure and efficient punishment. On the other hand the deterrent not to commit crimes is directly proportional to the certainty and immediacy of punishment, regardless the type of punishment whether it is a physical one or the deprivation of liberty.
Given the fact that we are Westerners and we abhor the law of Talion, we should pay a little bit more attention to the codes of criminal procedure. Have you ever wondered for instance what are general or specific mitigating or extenuating factors?
Should justice be consistent to the crime or circumstances in which it was committed? A friend of mine robs an apartment because he has no money to buy food, whilst I rob an apartment because I enjoy doing it or because I am a kleptomaniac. We both steal to satisfy our needs, in a potential trial we were both entitled to general or specific mitigating factors or to plea bargain with suspended sentence.
Plea bargain? Please tell me if this has something to do with justice.
As a simple citizen I never had to deal with Courtrooms. I thought of justice as the blindfolded goddess who is impartial because she cannot see anyone. Instead I find out that justice negotiates, just like at the market “we know you stole something and there are some ongoing investigations, don’t make us waste time and money, confess your crime and we can come to an agreement.
Well…let’s see art 2651 bis par. A) II sub paragraph of part 2, Code of criminal procedure vol. II states that in case of theft is punishable with one year in jail, but given the fact that you ask for a plea bargain, the punishment is reduced to 6 months and then as it is our first theft in this case you are entitled to general mitigating factors, so the punishment is reduced to 3 months and obviously we apply a suspended sentence for one year, therefore you must be very careful not to re-offend within one year, because in that case the penalty is implemented and you’ll go to jail for 3 months. When one year has elapsed you can smoothly start stealing again. The only disadvantage is that you are reported into a criminal record and when the police stop you they’ll find out that you were convicted for felony and that you have a criminal record. If by any chance you would like to become an honest citizen and look for a job, rest reassured that any employer can find out about your criminal record and therefore you will not be hired. Obviously any job in the public sector is out of the question.
In short I do not know if it is clear for you, you were convicted for theft, you did not go to jail, but your true punishment is the fact that you have no other option but carry on stealing.
In this an other similar cases the Court becomes a crime factory, the machine is so perfectly oiled that crime production outnumbers the completion of ongoing proceedings. There is a constant need of personnel, high demand and high salaries.
Often people get upset when MP vote for their own salary raise, but few people are aware that MP salaries are linked to magistrates salaries, therefore for once they are not guilty.
“You really make me laugh when you belch out like this but the art. of vol. II is a clear example of how twisted and burdensome is justice. It lost its true essence.
Thank you for telling me that I am belching out, but frankly I do not know who is belching forth more, they are concentrated on the motivations and circumstances in which an offence is caused to the point that crime itself (the most important fact i.e. the act of stealing) is considered something secondary.
There can be thousands of motivations and circumstances, and they may be even catalogued so, perhaps we can expect Vol. III and IV will be compiled.
It is far too easy to have an article of law stating that the act of stealing is punishable by law with one year imprisonment - upon the condition that the stolen goods are returned to their lawful owner - whether a car or a million euro are stolen.
Extenuating, mitigating factors, plea bargain would not exist, if you want to bargain you can go to the vegetable market. If you steal again the punishment gets worse, if you steal for the second time the punishment is 2-year imprisonment, if you steal for the third time the punishment is four years in jail, if you steal for the fourth time The sentence is eight years.
Even if you are smart and behave in an exemplary manner in jail you will not be released before the time is due and you will serve your sentence until the last second.
Once you have served your sentence, in the eye of the law your criminal record is clean, you can apply for a job in the public sector and, if you have the skills you can even become the President of the Republic.
The only record you are registered in is the one kept by the Court simply because you were previously convicted, and it has to be known in case you do it again.
"Dream on! Such an article in the Code would almost serve as deterrent as hand cutting and within two three years thefts would be likely to drop by 50% and then they could become sporadic.
Furthermore you did not consider the fact that if lawyers and prosecutors did not have the construct of plea bargain and extenuating factors to bring at hearings what could they argue about? Verdicts could be reached in a day and not in six months, one year or five years!
They would do their job, lawyers trying to prove the defendant’s innocence, prosecutors proving the opposite and the Court would issue rulings.
Another thing I do not understand for instance, and I am referring to more serious offences is that whoever murders two or three people before committing the crime is a normal person, but suddenly during the legal proceedings he becomes affected by mental incapacity. Any respectable defence lawyer promptly asks for a psychiatric expert because he knows there are extenuating factors involved.
What does mental incapacity mean? Does it perhaps mean that an individual is not able to reason and resolve problems? It seems that more or less that applies to all of us.
What is disconcerting is the disability of mind, being unable to act on your own will, on this ground how are you supposed to take action? You should vegetate for 30-40 years, motionless, waiting to die.
Even an insane person, in his own logic, is capable of acting on his own will, being driven by reason or instinct.
Therefore, going back to legal proceedings, to avoid being fooled by the usual smart individuals…. “excuse me you murdered someone and the psychiatric assessment report shows that your are mentally disable, your punishment is 25-year imprisonment, given the circumstances you cannot serve the sentence in prison, but in a Judicial Psychiatric Hospital (formerly criminal mental asylum) and however the punishment is still 25 years.
I am sure that after half an hour everybody would turn sane and after some time even psychiatric expert assessment requests would plunge… or at least they would be strictly limited to true insanity cases.
After all a criminal with mental disorders does not see much difference between Judicial Psychiatric Hospital and another similar facility if he suffers from disability of mind.
For a madman everything will do and perhaps he would prefer to be in prison for 30 years or for good, so he would not cause anymore troubles. Then if during his stay in a J.P.H. skilful doctors and treatment allow him to get back to a normal condition there’s no better chance to show this person that if you murder someone you have to be punished for that offence. It seems obvious that a sane person should serve his sentence in a standard prison. If a State cannot ensure the certainty and immediacy of the punishment I believe that is morally and ethically much better to apply the law of Talion.