these same liberals who are pro-abortion and have no problems with it are the same crazy people who cry and whine about animal rights.

 

go figure

 

 

we live in a society where animals are more important than human life

---

these same liberals who are pro-abortion and have no problems with it are the same crazy people who cry and whine about animal rights.

 

go figure

 

 

we live in a society where animals are more important than human life

 

There's hypocrisy on both sides.  I know many pro life folks who support the death penalty.  If human life is sacred, is there a point in the life cycle where that's not the case?  Setting aside the behavioral issue here, and strictly looking at it from a pro life perspective, how is one any different from the other?

 

I agree with you that pro abortion folks who are big advocates for strongly protecting animal, bug, fish, and tree life are major league hypocrites.  I also believe that abortion should never have become a political issue.

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

I also believe that abortion should never have become a political issue.

 

This isn't meant as a comment in the debate in this thread but over here in my part of the world abortion isn't a politicized issue. Some religious group tried make it an issue a few years back and everyone just told them to get lost, even the political parties that are nominally against abortion. Anyway, we now return to the regular schedule. 

---

There's hypocrisy on both sides.  I know many pro life folks who support the death penalty.  If human life is sacred, is there a point in the life cycle where that's not the case?  Setting aside the behavioral issue here, and strictly looking at it from a pro life perspective, how is one any different from the other?

 

It's the concept of innocence. A murderer has earned his fate, a "fetus" has merely existed.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

There's hypocrisy on both sides.  I know many pro life folks who support the death penalty.  If human life is sacred, is there a point in the life cycle where that's not the case?  Setting aside the behavioral issue here, and strictly looking at it from a pro life perspective, how is one any different from the other?

 

I agree with you that pro abortion folks who are big advocates for strongly protecting animal, bug, fish, and tree life are major league hypocrites.  I also believe that abortion should never have become a political issue.

Re your first point, those who support the death penalty believe in "an eye for an eye". what i mean is, the issue is not that ALL human life is sacred, i would argue that the INNOCENT of human life is sacred. that is the dividing point. If you take someone's life, and it is proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, then you need to suffer the consequences of your actions. 

---

It's the concept of innocence. A murderer has earned his fate, a "fetus" has merely existed.

just saw your post. i agree with you.

---

It's the concept of innocence. A murderer has earned his fate, a "fetus" has merely existed.

 

I heard a really good justification for the death penalty that planted me on one side for good.

 

The purpose of "jail" is to rehabilitate, when a citizen breaks a "law" the states not spanking them or punishing them, society is removing that individual from the public to prevent further crimes against others. During the time of separation the goal is to rehabilitate or address the issues that lead to an individual breaking whatever law.

 

Some laws once broken can not be undone there is no rehabilitating these individuals so the only way to address the problem is permanent separation. Take another life unjustifiably, harming a child, committing treason, these are crimes that can only be committed by someone that beyond rehabilitation. At that point the death penalty comes into play, either you're sentencing the rest of society to pay for this individual to live in a cell until nature takes its course or you're removing this individual from society permanently. 

---

I heard a really good justification for the death penalty that planted me on one side for good.

 

The purpose of "jail" is to rehabilitate, when a citizen breaks a "law" the states not spanking them or punishing them, society is removing that individual from the public to prevent further crimes against others. During the time of separation the goal is to rehabilitate or address the issues that lead to an individual breaking whatever law.

 

Some laws once broken can not be undone there is no rehabilitating these individuals so the only way to address the problem is permanent separation. Take another life unjustifiably, harming a child, committing treason, these are crimes that can only be committed by someone that beyond rehabilitation. At that point the death penalty comes into play, either you're sentencing the rest of society to pay for this individual to live in a cell until nature takes its course or you're removing this individual from society permanently. 

Death sentences cost more than life sentences. 

---

Death sentences cost more than life sentences. 

spare the criminal. kill the fetus, right??

---

I also read a pretty radical idea on the death penalty that I liked. I'll say it's not one I'd ever see being endorsed or practiced in real life, just sort of an idea I thought was interesting.

 

Anyway this guy proposed rather than giving authority to the state to end the life of a citizen, society would be better served if the state simply removed all protections of an individual upon being convicted of death penalty worthy crimes.

 

Basically you molested this child, you've been convicted, you're free to leave this court room but what happens once you leave those doors is beyond our control. You are hereby stripped of all rights as a human in the eyes of the law, they would basically be open game for society to deal with as they saw fit. Hang em from the gallows if you will. 

 

To me that idea seemed much worse than the death penalty, at least with the death penalty we put them down "humanly" 

---

Death sentences cost more than life sentences. 

 

Only because of the appeals and cost of death row care. 

---

when murderers are caught red-handed, we should revert back to what we used to do in the old days. kill them on the spot and set them up as a prop for everyone to see.

---

when murderers are caught red-handed, we should revert back to what we used to do in the old days. kill them on the spot and set them up as a prop for everyone to see.

 

eh instant justice is often only instant. 

---

instant and swift.

 

i'm a fan.

 

let's go back to that and look at the crime rates after about 20 years.

 

 

the bleeding heart liberals have RUINED this country with their crap. they care more for law-breakers than they do for the productive citizens in society.

---

instant and swift.

 

i'm a fan.

 

let's go back to that and look at the crime rates after about 20 years.

 

 

the bleeding heart liberals have RUINED this country with their crap. they care more for law-breakers than they do for the productive citizens in society.

that's like, your opinion. 

---

instant and swift.

 

i'm a fan.

 

let's go back to that and look at the crime rates after about 20 years.

 

 

the bleeding heart liberals have RUINED this country with their crap. they care more for law-breakers than they do for the productive citizens in society.

 

without due justice what you have is essentially a third world justice system. It's all good the swift action until your accused falsely of something and then facing that swift action.

---

instant and swift.

 

i'm a fan.

 

let's go back to that and look at the crime rates after about 20 years.

 

 

the bleeding heart liberals have RUINED this country with their crap. they care more for law-breakers than they do for the productive citizens in society.

 

Smoking crack again I see. :wacko:

---

LEONARD FOURNETTE FAN CLUB PRESIDENT. I WAS BEHIND HIM WHEN YOU ALL SAID HE WAS BRANDON JACOBS. QUIT HATING ON THE JAGUARS. GUS IS GONE. COUGHLIN HAS RESTORED ORDER. FOURNETTE IS FRED TAYLOR. DONT BELIEVE ME JUST WATCH.

without due justice what you have is essentially a third world justice system. It's all good the swift action until your accused falsely of something and then facing that swift action.

dont miss my previous posts where i said that it has to be BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT.

 

with these cases where we have video evidence of a murder and the person who is doing it, we can save a lot of tax payer money by handling it swift and quickly.

---

dont miss my previous posts where i said that it has to be BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT.

 

with these cases where we have video evidence of a murder and the person who is doing it, we can save a lot of tax payer money by handling it swift and quickly.

There have been death sentences carried out "beyond a shadow of a doubt" which later got overturned. 

---

dont miss my previous posts where i said that it has to be BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT.

 

with these cases where we have video evidence of a murder and the person who is doing it, we can save a lot of tax payer money by handling it swift and quickly.

 

But if you allow government the power to go around the constitution under ___ circumstances, you're still creating a path for government to go around the constitution.

---