Author Topic: The Death Penalty, for it or against it (Read 3237 times)

GtoRA2 · « **Reply #60 on:** April 19, 2005, 02:11:02 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
two GTO's (or hot rods of your choice) in every garage!

lazs

Who do I kill to get you in office?

vorticon · « **Reply #61 on:** April 19, 2005, 02:17:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
two GTO's (or hot rods of your choice) in every garage!

lazs

if i were american, youd have my vote...

lazs2 · « **Reply #62 on:** April 19, 2005, 02:20:28 PM »

so oboe... it would simply be "pro choice" to kill my neighbor so long as I had the choice to either kill him or not to kill him? I should not be denied my right to choose?

or... if I starve a leaching whiny baby to death who is living off of me.... is that a "choice"?

The two Hot rods in every garage thing.... I even know how to pay for it.

lazs

oboe · « **Reply #63 on:** April 19, 2005, 02:26:18 PM »

Toad,

Not being a doctor, scientist, or religious scholar, my own somewhat informed view is that human life begins at conception.
I wouldn't know what other kind of life to call a human embryo.

That does not imply though, that I think this human embryo should have full rights and protections as an independent person under the law. The embryo is completely dependent on the health and good will of the mother, as well as other factors (for example, has implantation even occured)?

How far do you want to go in protecting these unborn? We know alcohol and cigarette smoking is detrimental to their health -should we charge pregnant women who have a drink or smoke a cigarette with reckless child endangerment? What if she didn't realize she was pregnant? Charge her with Negligence as well?
How far should we go with this? Should we lock up repeat offenders until her child is born, and then take it away from her and then turn it over child protective services?

lazs2 · « **Reply #64 on:** April 19, 2005, 02:30:06 PM »

oboe... isn't an infant dependant on it's parents for all it needs to live?

lazs

Sandman · « **Reply #65 on:** April 19, 2005, 02:36:52 PM »

Hmmm... what if the sperm meets the egg in a petri dish? Is this not conception? Does this embryo have any rights?

bustr · « **Reply #66 on:** April 19, 2005, 02:37:50 PM »

oboe,

Life by it's nature always chooses to live.

Once the cells in the egg begin dividing, the cells are pro life with absolutely no choice in the matter. Choice defines premeditation. There for the mother is choosing to kill life, even if it's the life of those dividing cells. I think it would be more appropriate if the mother had to press the switch herself that destroys the cells and sign an affedavit to her action along with the father.

Just think about it. If I want to concealed carry and possibly shoot someone, I have to go through a grinder to get there. Why make the choice of destroying a baby easier for a woman?

But then again, amongst some mammelian predators, the female will premditatidly kill off some of her spawn if environmental conditions won't support the numbers she birthed.......at least we know we are predators........we just lack the {balls} to look ourselves between the legs and pull our own switch.......

oboe · « **Reply #67 on:** April 19, 2005, 02:46:08 PM »

How did I get into this discussion?

Laz, you indicated in a previous post that you are in favor of the right of a woman to have an abortion if the fetus is early enough in its development that it wouldn't survive on its own. Did I misinterpret that?

AFAIK, you currently have the right to choose to kill your neighbor. You would be probably be guilty of a crime, but I think that is your choice to make (I can vouch for your mental competence so you will be held accountable for your actions.)

An infant is dependent on someone else for its needs to live, but it doesn't have to be its parents - not the same relationship as a fetus/mother.

Toad · « **Reply #68 on:** April 19, 2005, 02:52:02 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by oboe
That does not imply though, that I think this human embryo should have full rights and protections as an independent person under the law.

So when does this embryo achieve full rights and protections in your view?

After exiting the birth canal? 5 months? 8 months? 2 months?

Where do we draw this line?

oboe · « **Reply #69 on:** April 19, 2005, 03:19:05 PM »

Laz,

I think I get what you mean - the choice is contingent on both actions being legal. So really when people talk about being pro-choice, what they want is some form of abortion to remain legal.
Is that what you are saying?

Toad -

What does Roe v Wade say about it? Seems to me that decision drew the lines you are wondering about, but not positive. My view is that its really none of my business.

Bustr - you say Life by its nature always chooses Life. What about the ongoing debates about assisted suicide?

Sandy - talk to the owner of the petri dish.

Toad · « **Reply #70 on:** April 19, 2005, 03:30:36 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by oboe
What does Roe v Wade say about it? Seems to me that decision drew the lines you are wondering about, but not positive. My view is that its really none of my business.

I really don't care what Roe v Wade says about it, either way.

Fortunately, I've never been involved in an abortion decison in any way shape or form.

However, if I were to be involved, I would make my decision based on my moral views, not Roe v Wade.

Here's the crux of it. No one wants to execute a convicted murderer if there is the most infinitesimal chance he may be innocent.

OTOH, NO ONE... not Roe, not Wade, not the Supreme Court, not the Momma, not the Daddy, not the lawyers... .NO ONE knows when that little mass of dividing cells actually becomes a human being. Despite that total uncertainty, we do not hesitate to allow the fetus to be killed until it's third trimester.

Murderer with 99.9% chance of guilt... save him due to the .1% chance he is innocent.

Fetus less than 7 months of age? Possible human being? Kill at the whim of the mother.

Yeah... great system.

midnight Target · « **Reply #71 on:** April 19, 2005, 04:31:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad

However, if I were to be involved, I would make my decision based on my moral views, not Roe v Wade.

Exactly!

And everyone else should have the same freedom of choice.

oboe · « **Reply #72 on:** April 19, 2005, 05:07:17 PM »

EDIT: I recognize a good closing argument when I see one.

Thanks MT

DREDIOCK · « **Reply #73 on:** April 19, 2005, 09:03:53 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Steve
Actually, I was taught in my CJ classes that public execution is the single biggest deterrent of capital crimes. Please do not ignore the importance of the word "public"

Agreed and all for public execution.

And I maintain the death penalty is a deterrent.

I know of nobody who has ever been executed under the death penalty who has ever commited another crime afterwards.

Same cant be said for some killers, rapists, etc who havent been.

ASTAC · « **Reply #74 on:** April 19, 2005, 09:18:19 PM »

Yes maybe even make them Pay-per view events to help fund the government the democrats cliam the Bush tax cuts is starving:aok

I'd like to see an electricution or two...maybe some people will be deterred by it.