Beaker Posted April 8, 2005 Report Share Posted April 8, 2005 I believe this country would have become great even w/o the death penalty. And I believe it could stay great w/o it too. I dont think having it played any significance in our country's ascent to the top. I do have a question as to the pro-death penalty, anti-abortion stance (and this is not an attack...its a question). How do you reconcile being for killing someone (death penalty) and being against killing someone (anti-abortion). That is one of the hardest questions I have faced in my thinking. Most people's arguments are centered around some form of the "one is guilty, one is innocent" justification. But to me that argument comes down to judging. Does it go any deeper than that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oldschooler Posted April 8, 2005 Report Share Posted April 8, 2005 [quote name='Beaker' date='Apr 8 2005, 09:30 AM']I believe this country would have become great even w/o the death penalty. And I believe it could stay great w/o it too. I dont think having it played any significance in our country's ascent to the top. I do have a question as to the pro-death penalty, anti-abortion stance (and this is not an attack...its a question). How do you reconcile being for killing someone (death penalty) and being against killing someone (anti-abortion). That is one of the hardest questions I have faced in my thinking. Most people's arguments are centered around some form of the "one is guilty, one is innocent" justification. But to me that argument comes down to judging. Does it go any deeper than that? [right][post="72933"][/post][/right][/quote] I wasn`t saying that we became great because of the Death Penalty. I was saying we have had it all along...I don`t see how not having the Death Penalty would make us better as a soceity...no1 has answered my question about how can you justify giving 2 people the same LIFE sentence when 1 commits a LESSER crime ? And the being for the Death Penalty and against abortion is simple. You get the Death Pealty for taking a life. And abortion is used on some1 that has done nothing but strive to have a life. Ultimately I am Pro Choice...but but I just think abortions should be harder to get and the man/father should have some say so in the CHOICE. If he wants her to keep it ...then he should have the right to adopt it or something... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer_Rice Posted April 8, 2005 Report Share Posted April 8, 2005 Beaker, Most of the folks I know who adopt that position make a distinction between "innocence" and "culpability." On that basis, I do not think that's inconsistent. Is that what you mean by judging? OS, That's a lot of questions and I'll reply to them tonight or tomorrow, as I have a pretty full schedule today. This one for now, as it tops the list, and seems to be important to you: [quote]Do you think YOU would be able to "take the high road" if Jessica Lunsford was YOUR daughter or grand daughter ? Or if the DC snipers killed your wife ?[/quote] Yes, and here's why. In the past four years my father and my older brother have died. It's my brother's circumstances that matter here. He was mentally retarded and never really had a chance to pursue a "normal" life. Worse, he was kind of like "Rain Man" and he had an awareness of his "differences", which of course made it even tougher on him. Worst of all, he died very suddenly of heat stroke (the same summer as Corey Stringer did.) When that happened, the parents (Dad was still alive) were shattered, so I had to go up to Cincy and do all the "work"--identify the body, make the arrangements, settle his affairs. That whole time I was in a mood best described as a very sad rage. I railed against the world for being so unfair and for dealing my brother so many injustices. I don't believe in the sort of God who intervenes in human affairs on a personal level, but I think those circumstances would be enough to cause those who do to ask some questions. Over time, the rage diminished and I came to the conclusion that justice is a "voluntary" thing. I could choose to be really pissed that life was unfair to my brother, or I could choose to try to rise above my anger. I try to be in charge of my emotions, instead of letting my emotions be in charge of me. Not always successful, but that's life. So, yes, I could take the high road, though I'd probably grumble about it for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted April 8, 2005 Report Share Posted April 8, 2005 [quote name='Beaker' date='Apr 8 2005, 10:30 AM']I believe this country would have become great even w/o the death penalty. And I believe it could stay great w/o it too. I dont think having it played any significance in our country's ascent to the top. I do have a question as to the pro-death penalty, anti-abortion stance (and this is not an attack...its a question). How do you reconcile being for killing someone (death penalty) and being against killing someone (anti-abortion). That is one of the hardest questions I have faced in my thinking. Most people's arguments are centered around some form of the "one is guilty, one is innocent" justification. But to me that argument comes down to judging. [b]Does it go any deeper than that?[/b] [right][post="72933"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] No, not really. Guilt versus innocence. Although, it is made even worse by the fact that murderers are killed in a humane way (relatively speaking), while the unborn are ripped to shreds, or boiled in acid (basically) or delivered most of the way, then have a knife jabbed into their skulls. (The "funny" thing about "partial birth abortion" is that even many who are pro-choice are against that method, and think it's barbaric - which it is - but from the standpoint of the baby, it is probably the quickest, and most humane method.) I want to know how the Pro-choice, anti-death-penalty people reconcile that stance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jza10304 Posted April 8, 2005 Author Report Share Posted April 8, 2005 [quote]Sources: Rudolph agrees to plead guilty Deal would allow accused bomber to avoid death penalty Friday, April 8, 2005 Posted: 4:55 PM EDT (2055 GMT) CNN) -- Former longtime fugitive Eric Robert Rudolph has agreed to plead guilty to a string of bombings, including the attack during the 1996 Olympics, in exchange for a life sentence, sources close to the case said Friday. The deal would give Rudolph a life sentence, the sources said. News of the deal came two days after jury selection began in the federal trial on one of the four bombings -- the January 1998 blast at a women's clinic in Birmingham, Alabama, that killed a police officer and injured a woman. (Background) Authorities in the Justice Department were expected to formally announce the deal later in the day, sources said. A former federal prosecutor expressed surprise by the deal and a woman maimed by the 1990s bombing spree said she was disappointed by news. In addition to the Birmingham bombing, the 38-year-old Rudolph is accused of planting a bomb in Atlanta's Centennial Olympic Park during the 1996 Olympics. The bomb went off during a concert in the park, killing one woman and injuring more than 100. Rudolph also faced charges in the 1997 bombings of a lesbian nightclub and a suburban women's clinic, both in the Atlanta area, blasts that injured a nine people. [b]Emily Lyons, a nurse who lost an eye in the 1998 Birmingham bombing, said she and her husband were "extremely disappointed" by the tentative agreement.[/b] [b]"We felt that the crime fit the punishment of death," she said. "But we knew it was the best choice to protect others."[/b] [b]Lyons said she did not believe that life in prison was "punishment enough" for Rudolph. But she said, "We hope that this is the end of this cycle for us."[/b] A witness spotted a man leaving the scene of the Birmingham blast and gave police the license number of a gray pickup that was registered to Rudolph. Rudolph disappeared from his home in Murphy, North Carolina, and remained a fugitive for more than five years before agents from the FBI and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives picked him up. Rudolph was arrested in May 2003 after a Murphy police officer spotted him about to go into a trash bin behind a grocery store in a search for food. Kent Alexander, the U.S. attorney in Atlanta at the time of the bombings there, said he was "surprised" by the plea agreement. [b]Alexander said he believed the Bush administration "was committed to getting the death penalty."[/b] Based on information provided by Rudolph during plea negotiations, FBI and ATF agents located and destroyed explosives stored in the mountains near Murphy, law enforcement sources said. The materials were considered old and unstable and were blown up in a series of three explosions over the past two days, the sources said. "A bomb and dynamite were located and safely disposed of in North Carolina based on information provided by Rudolph, a senior law enforcement official confirmed Friday.[/quote] Some folks are out for blood....[url="http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/04/08/rudolph.plea/index.html"]CNN.com[/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer_Rice Posted April 10, 2005 Report Share Posted April 10, 2005 [quote name='oldschooler' date='Apr 7 2005, 04:56 PM']I guess you`d have to lose a family member or friend 1st. And yes I have lost some1 to a murderer...so I speak what I feel. [right][post="72757"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] I'm sorry to hear that. [quote]Why show compassion to some1 that raped and killed your daughter ?[/quote] I don't think I'd feel compassion; I do think that imposing the death penalty is not justice. [quote]Why let them live out the rest of their days wasting away in a prison to die of old age ?[/quote] Keeps them from doing any more harm, that's the goal. Also, although I am a skeptic, the real purpose of incarceration is rehabilition, though most of these folks are too far gone. So, keep them in jail. [quote]How does that benefit US as a society ?[/quote] Keeps our society from being as barbaric as the criminals who commit the crime. [quote]Why should they get the same sentence as some1 that commited a crime and is serving a life sentence ?[/quote] Not sure exactly who [i]they[/i] are here; in any case, that's irrelevant. The point is the quality of justice meted out by the government. The death penalty is wrong unless the government is threatened. [quote]Anyway like I said ....you guys are saying that some1 who is setenced to life in prison for a LESSER crime ...deserves the same as some1 who kills in cold blood or the kills mutiple people ? How does that make sense ?[/quote] Nope, I'm saying the death penalty is barbaric and morally suspect, in most cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BadassBengal Posted April 10, 2005 Report Share Posted April 10, 2005 It's not revenge, it's punishment [img]http://www.pandaystudio.com/Sketches/punisher.jpg[/img] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oldschooler Posted April 10, 2005 Report Share Posted April 10, 2005 [quote name='Homer_Rice' date='Apr 10 2005, 04:49 PM']I don't think I'd feel compassion; I do think that imposing the death penalty is not justice.[right][post="73750"][/post][/right][/quote] It is a LAW in 38 states. If you commit the crime then you pay the price. Penatly = punishment [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//3.gif[/img] [quote]Keeps them from doing any more harm, that's the goal. Also, although I am a skeptic, the real purpose of incarceration is rehabilition, though most of these folks are too far gone. So, keep them in jail.[/quote] Death accomplishes the same thing... [quote]Keeps our society from being as barbaric as the criminals who commit the crime. Not sure exactly who [i]they[/i] are here; in any case, that's irrelevant. The point is the quality of justice meted out by the government. The death penalty is wrong unless the government is threatened.[/quote] Yeah we are as barbaric as some1 that chops a person up and buries their body parts all over Butler county... And you`re saying that if they catch the person(s) that mailed the anthrax then it`s OK to put them to death ? [quote]Nope, I'm saying the death penalty is barbaric and morally suspect, in most cases.[/quote] Don`t kill people and you don`t have any worries. I have posted several times that 2.5% of all murderes are sentenced to the Death Penalty ...that means the 97.5% that weren`t AS BAD got a lesser sentence...how is that "barbaric" ? I would say that killing your wife and unborn child on Christmas Eve (Peterson) is barbaric...I would say shooting innocent people that you don`t even know (D.C. sniper) is barbaric...I would say kidknapping a little girl...raping her and then killing her is barabric....but putting some1 to death that commited any of these crimes against US ALL... when they knew that if they were caught they would forfeit their own life ...well ...that`s justice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted April 10, 2005 Report Share Posted April 10, 2005 So, Homer, you think it is morally wrong to execute a murderer. I can understand, and respect that position. I happen to disagree though. But I am curious what your position is on abortion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer_Rice Posted April 10, 2005 Report Share Posted April 10, 2005 [quote name='Jason' date='Apr 10 2005, 07:36 PM']So, Homer, you think it is morally wrong to execute a murderer. I can understand, and respect that position. I happen to disagree though. But I am curious what your position is on abortion? [right][post="73786"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] Pro-life, unless there is imminent danger to the pregnant mother. Not opposed to the use of contraceptives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BengalBacker Posted April 11, 2005 Report Share Posted April 11, 2005 [quote name='Homer_Rice' date='Apr 7 2005, 10:13 AM']On the other hand, the barbarians are at the gate in [url="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4415135.stm"]Florida[/url]. [right][post="72623"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] I just now read the link you posted. I applaud what Florida is doing. The barbarians are the ones attacking innocent people, not those who defend themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer_Rice Posted April 11, 2005 Report Share Posted April 11, 2005 [quote name='oldschooler' date='Apr 10 2005, 06:17 PM']It is a LAW in 38 states. If you commit the crime then you pay the price. Penatly = punishment [img]http://forum.go-bengals.com/public/style_emoticons//3.gif[/img] Death accomplishes the same thing... Yeah we are as barbaric as some1 that chops a person up and buries their body parts all over Butler county... [/quote] Agreed, it is the positive law in many states. As I said in an earlier post, there is always tension between positive and natural law. [quote]And you`re saying that if they catch the person(s) that mailed the anthrax then it`s OK to put them to death ?[/quote] I'm saying it is okay to consider the possibility. It depends on the level of threat to the government. Mostly, Article III, section 3 of the Constitution stuff. [quote]Don`t kill people and you don`t have any worries.[/quote] Once again, it isn't about individual people, it is about the response of the government, as the embodiment of all the people, which is supposed to represent the highest ideals of a republic. The content of potential high ideals is debatable, naturally, and our form of gevernment takes that into consideration. [quote]I have posted several times that 2.5% of all murderes are sentenced to the Death Penalty ...that means the 97.5% that weren`t AS BAD got a lesser sentence...how is that "barbaric" ?[/quote] We are talking about the government sanctioning the death penalty, not how it is applied, but that it is applied at all. I say the only time it should be considered is when the government itself is in danger; you take a different view. It's not only about respect for the nature of government, it is also about principles pertaining to life, as a whole. Of course, it gets messy in particular instances, but it is the principle that matters and ought to be our guide. [quote]I would say that killing your wife and unborn child on Christmas Eve (Peterson) is barbaric...I would say shooting innocent people that you don`t even know (D.C. sniper) is barbaric...I would say kidknapping a little girl...raping her and then killing her is barabric....but putting some1 to death that commited any of these crimes against US ALL... when they knew that if they were caught they would forfeit their own life ...well ...that`s justice. [right][post="73762"][/post][/right][/quote] I agree that many crimes are often heinous and barbaric. But, no, killing them back is not really justice. It's merely an eye for an eye, which I will concede that some people think of as justice, but which other people think of as retribution. By your litmus, why haven't we sentenced to death any number of political or corporate leaders who are culpable for the deaths of individuals, often on a large scale? How many (if any, because I do not know) people died in California a few years ago because of the frauds run by energy companies? Likewise, incompetent doctors who kill their patients? Why wasn't Robert E Lee and Jeff Davis executed? I think you might suggest extenuating circumstances. Yet, even in the case of Confederates, who certainly fit the bill as traitors to many people, there was only one execution on the basis of what we would now call "war crimes": the fellow who ran Andersonville Prison. And some people objected to that with reasonable, coherent arguments. (Some folks might want to toss in those who were executed for the assassination of Lincoln.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer_Rice Posted April 11, 2005 Report Share Posted April 11, 2005 [quote name='BengalBacker' date='Apr 10 2005, 08:17 PM']I just now read the link you posted. I applaud what Florida is doing. The barbarians are the ones attacking innocent people, not those who defend themselves. [right][post="73797"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] Well, these things tend to get overblown at first. Here in KY we have concealed carry laws which bothered a lot of folks, but which, over time, do not seem to have raised the level of lawlessness. We'll just have to see how it plays out down there. My concern is what I perceive to be an overall slide in many applications of the law, and this includes impulses towards euthanasia and what appears to be a greater tolerance of "torture", for example. The death penalty is among these. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted April 11, 2005 Report Share Posted April 11, 2005 WARNING: if you don't want to hear some disturbing news about the jessica lunsford girl, don't [url="http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1113070922249_6/?hub=World"]click here[/url] this might not change opionons against the death penality, but imo, if he doesn't get the death penalty, justice wouldn't be done. btw, so i don't avoid the article jza posted earlier, i agree that the lady w/ a hurt eye isn't the reason that guy deserves the death penalty... didn't three people get killed in that blast? if you were trying to show that there are dangerious extremists on the right, there is no arguement though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jza10304 Posted April 11, 2005 Author Report Share Posted April 11, 2005 [quote name='bengalrick' date='Apr 11 2005, 10:54 AM']WARNING: if you don't want to hear some disturbing news about the jessica lunsford girl, don't [url="http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1113070922249_6/?hub=World"]click here[/url] this might not change opionons against the death penality, but imo, if he doesn't get the death penalty, justice wouldn't be done. btw, so i don't avoid the article jza posted earlier, i agree that the lady w/ a hurt eye isn't the reason that guy deserves the death penalty... didn't three people get killed in that blast? if you were trying to show that there are dangerious extremists on the right, there is no arguement though... [right][post="73891"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] One person died in the attack, and this lady who got an eye hurt is calling for death. As far as the dangerous extremist comment, were you referring to the lady or to the bomber, Eric Rudolph? Eric Rudolph was an extremist, but that was not the point. I was referring to the lady who wanted him killed because of the pain he had caused her. It is a temporary relief to a situation that may never heal ccompletely(referring to the death of a loved one). You may feel better initially after they are sentenced to death, and even better after the person dies, but in the end it will not bring them back and that void will still be there. IMO that is why people carry on long, drawn out, legal proceedings. It gives them something they feel productive to do in memory of that person (Terri), rather than face the finality of death. It has a lot to do with the fact that they can't deal with the grief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bengalrick Posted April 11, 2005 Report Share Posted April 11, 2005 [quote name='jza10304' date='Apr 11 2005, 11:09 AM']One person died in the attack, and this lady who got an eye hurt is calling for death. As far as the dangerous extremist comment, were you referring to the lady or to the bomber, Eric Rudolph? Eric Rudolph was an extremist, but that was not the point. I was referring to the lady who wanted him killed because of the pain he had caused her. It is a temporary relief to a situation that may never heal ccompletely(referring to the death of a loved one). You may feel better initially after they are sentenced to death, and even better after the person dies, but in the end it will not bring them back and that void will still be there. IMO that is why people carry on long, drawn out, legal proceedings. It gives them something they feel productive to do in memory of that person (Terri), rather than face the finality of death. It has a lot to do with the fact that they can't deal with the grief. [right][post="73909"]<{POST_SNAPBACK}>[/post][/right][/quote] i guess both rudolph and the "hurt eye" lady are both extremist, but i meant rudolph... i don't think rudolph deserves death b/c of the hurt eye lady, but he does for letting a bomb off, and killing someone... (in other terms) if he would have done the same thing, and nobody lost their life, he didn't derserve the death penalty imo... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
|Bunghole| Posted April 11, 2005 Report Share Posted April 11, 2005 I say it's justice for those most heinous of crimes that can be proven beyond any shred of doubt. I am uneasy with the prospect of an innocent person being put to death, however. Hopefully DNA evidence will only become more convincing than it already is to either convict or acquit. I'm back...borrowing a laptop... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.