Jump to content

The Death Penalty

pvenne

By pvenne
in The Coffee House

are you for, against, or unsure of, the death penalty? why?  

41 members have voted

  1. 1. are you for, against, or unsure of, the death penalty? why?

    • for it, of course.
      14
    • against it, duh.
      18
    • unsure.
      1
    • depends.
      8

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Snowguy716 Burg

Snowguy716

Posted
Posted

I believe murder is wrong. Pre-meditated killing of a human being is wrong whether they're guilty of a crime or not.

And to those that find abortion wrong:

Garrison Keillor said it well when he said "And all of those protesters at the abortion clinic holding up signs in opposition to abortion, why don't you hold up signs telling us how many hours of child care you've given that week, and then I might take you seriously."

Roe v. Wade was a product of the courts, not a product of liberals. The liberals have simply defended what is seen by the American legal system as a woman's right from constant attacks by conservatives that would rather see an America ruled by the Bible as they see it, and not by the laws of liberty.

Thomas Jefferson would be turning in his grave if he knew some of the things that are being challenged in this country right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RiversideGator Burg

RiversideGator

Posted
Posted

Who created religion?

If you are a Christian (or Jew or Muslim), you believe that God "created" religion by revealing His Truth to the world. If you are an atheist or agnostic, you believe that man created religion.

Garrison Keillor said it well when he said "And all of those protesters at the abortion clinic holding up signs in opposition to abortion, why don't you hold up signs telling us how many hours of child care you've given that week, and then I might take you seriously."

Child care is not relevant to murder. I believe that both born and unborn children should be cared for. I also dont see how quoting a folk humorist bolsters your argument.

Roe v. Wade was a product of the courts, not a product of liberals. The liberals have simply defended what is seen by the American legal system as a woman's right from constant attacks by conservatives that would rather see an America ruled by the Bible as they see it, and not by the laws of liberty.

Roe v. Wade was a product of liberal activist Judges on the Supreme Court. They were tired of having to go through the democratic process to achieve their policy goals so they decided to have 7 men in black robes impose abortion on America rather than let the people through their respective state legislatures decide. This an all too frequent pattern of the Left of subverting the democratic process in this country.

Thomas Jefferson would be turning in his grave if he knew some of the things that are being challenged in this country right now.

Thomas Jefferson would likely start a 2d Revolution were he alive today. He would be, for one, shocked by the raw power grab by the Supreme Court which was intended to be a very weak third branch of government rather than an all powerful House Of Lords. I am not sure he would be a Republican, but he would certainly not be a Democrat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ironchapman City

ironchapman

Posted
Posted

^Remember, too, that Jefferson was a religious man. He was a deist.

I don't see how people can avoid noticing the influence of religion in the country's goverment. The Constitution protects us from religion having direct control over the government, but it doesn't say anything about preventing its influence. This is where everything from opposition to gay marriage to the abolition of slavery can claim some, if not all, of its roots, the influence of religion on man's voting habits. Man is led by his beliefs, and, to many in this country, those are Christian beliefs, which will probably sway him to vote a certain way.

The values of religions such as Christianity have become so used over time to that they have become standard values for this country.

As far as the Bible being consistent: Hardly. There are contradictions EVERYWHERE in the Bible. For example, the Bible tells slaves that they should be content with their masters.

Remember these two things:

  • God freed the Jews from slavery.

  • The devil can quote scripture if he wishes so that it may suit his purposes.

The slave masters more than likely were using the "you should be content with your masters" device as a means of controlling the slaves. See entry #2 on my list for more.

EDIT: Fixed a typo in the word "slavery".

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ruso Hamlet

Ruso

Posted
Posted

If you are a Christian (or Jew or Muslim), you believe that God "created" religion by revealing His Truth to the world.  If you are an atheist or agnostic, you believe that man created religion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree with you there. My point, then, is depending on what each of you believe.

:ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ruso Hamlet

Ruso

Posted
Posted

How does capitalism change your stance?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Seemingly, in a capitalist society, civilians are nothing but materalistic pigs! Communism, of course, changes them.

daniel18: How can you determine who lives or not according to your or their ideology. Talk about hipocrecy!

Again, this kind of doublemoral is laughable(is that a word?).

:ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RiversideGator Burg

RiversideGator

Posted
Posted

Against it if it is a capitalist country, but a necessary evil in socialist countries, but try to abandon this practice in the future when the enemies of the people are finished.

This is just jibberish. I trust he is joking as no serious person can argue in favor of communism given its utter failure every time it has been tried.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
krazeeboi Gigalopolis

krazeeboi

Posted
Posted

With the DNA and microscopic evidence now used at trial, I would wager that there are no innocent men on Death Row nowdays.  This is largely a problem of the past.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

While I have no objections to the death penalty theoretically, I cannot totally agree with this assesment. Before the use of DNA was widely used, many people were unjustly convicted of crimes, and many times they have to go through so much red tape just to have whatever evidence exists tested. For crimes committed today, it's not really a problem, but for those that were committed way back when, it's more of a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MikesLogic Whistle-Stop

MikesLogic

Posted
Posted

I'm totally against it. If murder is wrong then it is also wrong for the state to murder. Its that simple.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My thoughts exactly, it is wrong on many fronts. Murder whether your doing it out of hate/vengeance/justice is all the same its premeditated killing of another human being. There can be sufficient punishments applied to capital offenders without resorting to murder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.