It’s amazing enough that the plotter of the Pan Am Lockerbie bombing, who killed several hundred innocent people twenty years ago over Scotland in a horrific and terrifying manner, only got sentenced to 27 years. Now, the Scottish judge who oversees his case is letting him go for reasons of compassion, because he’s dying of cancer and wants to die near family and friends. Now imagine how you would feel if your loved one was killed by someone, on an airplane or otherwise, and a judge made this decision about your loved one’s killer. If you can honestly say that you would root for the judge to let the killer go, to die in peace and comfort, then you truly do subscribe to the adage, “Turn the Other Cheek.” If you would do no such thing, then be honest about it. But don’t just be honest about how you feel. Be honest about your opposition to the tenet of supposed moral wisdom that tells us to forgive others, no matter what they have done. I understand the opposition to the Scottish judge’s decision, even from our pacifist President and Congress. I don’t understand why we’re not doing more. I don’t understand why we don’t impose some kind of sanctions against the Scottish government who employs this judge. I don’t understand why this doesn’t come from the American people, themselves–with the backing of our national government. This is, after all, no different from letting killers of the 9/11 attacks go. Here’s what I understand, least of all: Why do a majority of people who condemn the actions of this judge fail to equally condemn the notion of ethics upon which his decision was based? All the judge is saying is, “Put your money where your mouth is, Westerners. If you really claim to be Christian and to believe in forgiveness and compassion above all else, then you should applaud this decision.” I’m prepared to say I don’t claim to believe in all that evil, vicious nonsense. Are you?