Author Topic: Death Penalty... yes or no? (Read 3655 times)

Kieran · « **Reply #90 on:** November 19, 2002, 01:50:26 PM »

SW-

The question was how people felt about the death penalty. It went from there to a comparison of abortion. It's all about opinion.

Pull your panties out of your crack.

hardcase · « **Reply #91 on:** November 19, 2002, 01:54:10 PM »

I told you Goodwine was a Daddy Spank. He is not pro life, he, like most profess to be so, but only to control the women. When it comes down to it, it is that God Wrath thing he wants to see, punishment for all the evil trangressors.LOL.

judgement, and punishment, should be swift and final

Daddy Spank

HC

lazs2 · « **Reply #92 on:** November 19, 2002, 01:56:13 PM »

thrawn... not to put too fine a point on it but.... isn't abortion performed on the unborn (and sometimes that is debateable) babies body and not the mothers? The mother is not "aborted".

I don't really care but I would like someone to explain to me at what point a human is.... human. At that point it seems that he is protected or convicted by societies laws regardless of his ability to speak for himself. Soo.... at what point is a fetus a human being? At what point is a baby human? seriously.

The criminal rolled the dice and lost... how does that compare to the total inocence of the newborn or allmost born or ... whatever it is?

of the two arguements the pro life pro death penalty one seems the most logical... The pro abortion anti death penalty seems backwards... orwellian... you wish to kill the inocent but allow the guilty to live and maybe kill again.
lazs

Thrawn · « **Reply #93 on:** November 19, 2002, 02:01:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Eagler
huh?

If you must know, you sicko, not enough & yes I'm ashamed as I do not get enough of them

sorry if I put you in a corner, I did not mean to single you out

I'm not in a corner Eagler, I have never paid for an abortion and, as far as I know, only impregnated one woman once.

I was pointing out that it was none of your business because I thought it wasn't, not because I felt guilty. I wanted my points to stand on their own merits, not because I hadn't been in the situation you discribed.

H. Godwineson · « **Reply #94 on:** November 19, 2002, 02:02:26 PM »

Most of you guys defending abortion have already been born.

AksWulfe, I've been giving to charities and the poor all my life. So cut the cracks about anti-abortion people being "unconcerned" about the suffering of the poor.

Most of the abortions performed in the U.S. are performed on middle and upper class women. Most of the poor women and girls in my area do not even consider having an abortion. Not because they cannot afford it but because they do not believe in it. Likewise the sex is mostly voluntary, with rape being a rarity. There is no longer any moral stygma attached to having a child out of wedlock.

We are living in a society that no longer attempts to control its glands.

Shuckins

lazs2 · « **Reply #95 on:** November 19, 2002, 02:02:30 PM »

hardcase... where do you see men decideing the fate of women here? They are simply not allowing pro abortionists to decide the fate of another human being (if it is indeed a human being).

I don't care... kill all the fetus you like but don't be a sissy about it and act like it isn't killing another human being and then go out and cry for the poor sociopaths life. Sounds cowardly and dishonest to me... able to do the one cause it is convienent and you can't hear the screams but not the other because they look at you? Sheesh be a man about it.
lazs

Kieran · « **Reply #96 on:** November 19, 2002, 02:02:31 PM »

Yeah Lazs, but unless you give to charity you can't say that. SW said so.

AKS\/\/ulfe · « **Reply #97 on:** November 19, 2002, 02:03:29 PM »

You're right Kieran...

But it wasn't me who brought up morals. Many other, incidently people who are "pro-life" did, so I challenged them.

I got the answer I wanted, and it disgusts me.

Lazs, what about pro-death penalty and pro-"I don't give a toejam since it ain't my business"?

Death penalty should be reserved for the truly heinous crimes(rape included), and/or repeat criminals that commit acts of violence.
-SW

Thrawn · « **Reply #98 on:** November 19, 2002, 02:08:53 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
thrawn... not to put too fine a point on it but.... isn't abortion performed on the unborn (and sometimes that is debateable) babies body and not the mothers? The mother is not "aborted".

I don't really care but I would like someone to explain to me at what point a human is.... human. At that point it seems that he is protected or convicted by societies laws regardless of his ability to speak for himself. Soo.... at what point is a fetus a human being? At what point is a baby human? seriously

It is the operation is performed on both. Tell a woman that has had an abortion that nothing has actually happend to her.

The difference is is that the fetus isn't a unique individual. It is completely dependant on the host for survival. The host's rights supercede that of the fetus's until the point in time in which the fetus can live without the host. If it can live without the host then it is a distinct viable human being.

Do you consider the moral ramifications of a tumour that is removed?

A fetus's hearts beats, so does a worms.
The fetus contains the potential to be a human,so does a sperm.

H. Godwineson · « **Reply #99 on:** November 19, 2002, 02:09:30 PM »

Hardcase,

Make a coherent argument please. I'm condemning "abortion for the sake of convenience" , and women who refuse to accept the consequences of their actions. I am against abortion as a method of contraception because there are less repugnant ways of achieving the same result.

And yes, I do believe in sin. Normally I don't get involved in telling someone else how to live their lives. But I am speaking out now for those who cannot speak for themselves.

Shuckins

Kieran · « **Reply #100 on:** November 19, 2002, 02:13:40 PM »

Quote

Do you consider the moral ramifications of a tumour that is removed?

Comparing a tumor to a fetus? Can I be reading this?

Eagler · « **Reply #101 on:** November 19, 2002, 02:15:55 PM »

that's it in a nutshell

once you take God, a Soul and the hereafter out of the equation - all things are possible & justified as it is a me, me, me world.

Thrawn
the difference is a Soul, but as you do not believe in one, I can only guess there is no difference to you btwn a worm and a baby.

sorry to hear that

hardcase · « **Reply #102 on:** November 19, 2002, 02:17:46 PM »

Criminal rolled the dice..remember now, he is one of those precisous lives that get ignored once they are born. He was not born wanting to kill. How did he get there? I dont think you can be pro life and pro death, simply because the one you want to kill, is precious. He is alive. These are you arguments against abortion.

No wait.....he asked for it, so we can whump his ass...but wait..the mother asked for it too, right? So we can whump her ass. We christians sure like our bellybutton whumpings. By God, diddly up and disobey what we obey and we will whump yo' bellybutton too.

So, lets look at what you obey....the history of a a 4 thousand year old middle eastern desert patriarchial philosophy based on total submission to the father, to the point Abe was gonna gut his son cause "god told him to"(today that excuse still gets you executed). The idea that someone knows best for another is a bit to parental for me, based on the notion that what you believe somehow gives you the right to impose your belief system on others.

Hundreds of millions have died by others attempts to impose their will. Time to learn.

HC

AKS\/\/ulfe · « **Reply #103 on:** November 19, 2002, 02:19:59 PM »

If this is correct, "Total abortions from1973 to 1998 -- 38,010,378"

That's for the US...

We would be living in one crowded country.
-SW

source: http://www.nrlc.org/abortion/aboramt.html

miko2d · « **Reply #104 on:** November 19, 2002, 02:22:32 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Thrawn
Lazs was the person who said it WAS a deterrant. Asked, :Then why this...?"

You statement still doesn't support Lazs's statement that capital punishment is a deterrant.

It surely does not - neither it is intended to. It just claims that your comparison with another state is invalid and does not support your claim to the opposite.

Let me make a non-political analogy - some people have problems with logic when politics are concerned but not otherwise:

Lazs: Installing a window awning makes room much cooler.

Thrawn: All houses in Florida have window awnings and the rooms there are still hotter than rooms in Iceland where nobody bothers with window awnings! Window awnings do not work!

Eagler: Have you ever been through a pregnancy with a woman, everyday for nine+ months?

Are you implying that you tried to force her to have an abortion and needed the help of the law to restrain you? As long as you mind your own fetuses, the question of abortion should be purely academic for you - unless someone tries to use your tax dollars.

Eagler: If it is just another "freedom", why the shame?

So everything shamefull or just uncomfortable to talk about must be illegal in your world?
Well, I did not really have an abortion to admit to but for your sake I will state that I've just took a crap. I do not really bring that up in the conversations, but since you insist... Wand the description of texture and color? Maybe a digital picture next time?

Eagler: have you asked a fetus, did one tell you it doesn't know?

Fetus is created within an individual/family - not in the society. So as a parent I can make the decision.
Of course the commies and/or religious fanatics believe that society is more important than family or/and individual and has first claim to anything.

Keez: Grab a 9mm and whack the brains of the 2 weeks old baby next door against the walls.

That would be an invasion of someone else's private domain. Babies usually belong to somebody. Of course if the baby does not belong to anyone and nobody intends to claim it, he will die anyway so you may waste a bulet and whack the brains or watch him die naturally and not make a slighest moral difference. Of course if someone claims the baby of there is a reason to believe someone intends to, the situation reverts to the original one.

It's really a matter of freedom as security of one's domain and property. Your not being allowed to do somehing with other people's domain is not becasue some details of what is happening in that domain, but just becasue it is their domain.

miko