| abortion and capital punishment: your opinions? |
| pro-life; anti death penalty |
|
13% |
[ 13 ] |
| pro-life; pro death penalty |
|
9% |
[ 9 ] |
| pro-choice; anti death penalty |
|
47% |
[ 44 ] |
| pro-choice; pro death penalty |
|
29% |
[ 27 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 93 |
|
Philologos
Phoenix
Joined: Jan 22, 2010
Posts: 6977
|
 Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 2:31 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| visagrunt wrote: |
1) Capital punishment is ineffective at preventing crime or protecting the public.
2) Capital punishment is subject to irremediable error.
|
No possible disagreement on point 2. Having recalled essentially that principle somewhat pompously preached to my fairly significant person of the time is after all the amin reason I am still on live.
Point 1, though - not as a disputation of course, since it is self evident - I would ask, have you spotted or conceived anything that MIGHT be effective a preventing crime or protecting the public?
-----
Minority Report [the story was much better than the film] postulated even precognitive prevention was fatally flawed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Master_Pedant
Rocky Anderson for President!
Joined: Mar 15, 2009
Posts: 4707
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| zer0netgain wrote: |
A person convicted by due process for a heinous crime beyond any doubt has forfeited his/her right to live, and their death is a just punishment. Keep in mind the Bible actually authorized the death penalty for much, much more than what most secular societies enumerate.
My only issue with the death penalty is one of evidence...being certain that the convicted was proven by an irrefutable amount of evidence and that they did receive motivated and highly-qualified legal counsel when the punishment was sought against them. The sloppiness of many judicial systems is the only reason to really question the use of the death penalty (in my opinion). |
The fact that the Old Testament authorized stoning adulterers and gay men is repulsive. Honestly, how the hell can you write that with a straight face or treat it as some legitimate piece of evidence? Are you of the same mindset as Theocrats in Iran or something like that?
The fact that the Bible has little regard for the life of fully conscious, introspective, and independently viable human beings isn't something to gloat about in an argument over whether authorizing the state to kill people in retribution is an a-okay idea. That filthy book gleefully describe Moses permitting the rape of girls from an enemy group. That Ancient Hebrew culture, built along group fanaticism and a pervasive belief in disproportionate retribution isn't a guide for any sane, civilized, (comparatively) peaceful society.
And, yes, even given I have utilitarian objections over how the state legitimizing retribution by death has perverse effects on the broader culture, I *MIGHT* be able to live with it if Judicial Systems weren't so bloody errant and unequal. To AceOfSpades, any bloody time the death penalty is implemented in a place with First World civil rights, it's frickin' expensive. More expensive than life-imprisonment. I, for one, am not willing to tear down various civilizing legal precedents to make capital punishment less costly. The deterrence argument itself is daft, given that narcissists who don't think they'll get caught or criminals acting impulsively at the spur of the moment aren't going to suddenly start thinking "Hmmmm..... I could've gotten 200 years in a crummy prison, no doubt where I'd be at the bottom of the Totem Poll - below all those drug offenders and petty thieves - where I'd probably get beaten up- but that's no deterrent! There's the chance I'll be executed now, so I guess my unbeatable plan will have to wait or my impulse to strangle this homeowner with a gun so I'm not shot will have to last 30 seconds less, so he still has air in his lungs and I don't get the death penalty." NOBODY thinks like that when in the midst of committing crimes.
And to ValentineWiggin, how the hell can you be a democratic socialist yet promote the prodigious use of of an institutional process that's obscenely unequal? Prosecutors, if I'm not mistaken, are PAID on the basis of how many people they convict. A poor American whose a member of a racial minority or even a low-income Caucasian American is much more likely to get shafted by smooth-talking prosecutors outgunning their cheap, publicly provided lawyers. A wealthy athlete, on the other hand, can pretty much get away with murder.
_________________
http://www.voterocky.org/
Last edited by Master_Pedant on Sun Jul 31, 2011 3:42 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
Philologos
Phoenix
Joined: Jan 22, 2010
Posts: 6977
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Not to forget the alleged plice quotas for citations and arrests. |
|
| Back to top |
|
AceOfSpades
Deeds not words
Joined: Feb 12, 2006
Posts: 3647
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Master_Pedant wrote: | | And, yes, even given I have utilitarian objections over how the state legitimizing retribution by death has perverse effects on the broader culture, I *MIGHT* be able to live with it if Judicial Systems weren't so bloody errant and unequal. To AceOfSpades, any bloody time the death penalty is implemented in a place with First World civil rights, it's frickin' expensive. More expensive than life-imprisonment. I, for one, am not willing to tear down various civilizing legal precedents to make capital punishment less costly. The deterrence argument itself is daft, given that narcissists who don't think they'll get caught or criminals acting impulsively at the spur of the moment aren't going to suddenly start thinking "Hmmmm..... I could've gotten 200 years in a crummy prison, no doubt where I'd be at the bottom of the Totem Poll - below all those drug offenders and petty thieves - where I'd probably get beaten up- but that's no deterrent! There's the chance I'll be executed now, so I guess my unbeatable plan will have to wait or my impulse to strangle this homeowner with a gun so I'm not shot will have to last 30 seconds less, so he still has air in his lungs and I don't get the death penalty." NOBODY thinks like that when in the midst of committing crimes. |
I don't remember mentioning anything about deterrence so nice strawman and I'm loving the condescending tone. I am well aware that deterrence is only effective if it is immediate and certain rather than if it is in some vague, uncertain, and distant future. This is why crooks fear armed citizens more than cops. Impulsiveness, lack of foresight, and egocentricism are very common traits among crooks, especially violent crooks so obviously the death penalty doesn't do much to deter but it will stop them from committing more crimes permanently whether it is murdering other inmates in prison, raping other inmates and contributing to spreading even more STD's than we already have these days, and calling shots from behind bars to kill people on the outside. As for the costs, I'm in favour of cutting down on the number of appeals but the justice system also has to stop relying so heavily on the testimony of filthy rats who are willing to point the finger at innocents so they don't pay the full price for what they did. The jury should also somehow notified about the fallibility and shakiness of DNA evidence as it isn't anywhere near as crystal clear as CSI makes it out to be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
DW_a_mom
Ignoring the To-Do List
Joined: Feb 23, 2008
Posts: 9295
Location: Northern California
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My real answer is not on the list:
Pro-life within my own life, ie actively doing things that I believe reduce the incidence of abortion, and otherwise support the conception to grave teachings of my faith.
Politically pro-choice because the whole darn thing gets complicated, and I have no right to force people to make decisions that are often harmful to themselves based on my faith. I can and have influenced people face to face. The law is not the right tool.
I also consider it inconsistent for someone to call themselves pro-life but advocate for the death penalty. The death is killing done in all our names, even though I want no part in it. It is a political taking of life and, therefore, must be opposed through law.
_________________
Mom to an amazing AS boy (plus a non-AS daughter). Have at least a few AS genes myself, although probably more NT than AS.
---
Think of the greening of my name as an emeritus thing; I used to be a moderator but am retired and have no authority to act |
|
| Back to top |
|
number5
Phoenix
Joined: Jun 16, 2009
Posts: 1691
Location: sunny philadelphia
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 5:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Booyakasha wrote: | If abortion would be made illegal, it might also mean increase in illegal means of abortion which might lead to infection, sterility and the increased mortality among pregnant women. Children might be born handicapped due to unsuccessful abortion attempts, not to mention what happens to the unwanted children and how they're treated.
Something similar happened in Ceausescu's era in Romania with the famous Decree 770 - i.e. The 1966 law concerning prohibition of abortion in Romania. The direct consequence of the decree was a huge baby boom. Between 1966 and 1967 the number of births increased by almost 100%, and the number of children per woman increased from 1.9 to 3.7.
In the seventies, birth rates declined again. The economic need for small families remained, and people began to seek ways to circumvent the decree. Wealthier women were able to obtain contraceptives illegally, or bribed doctors to give diagnoses which made abortion possible. Especially among the less educated and poorer women there were many unwanted pregnancies. These poorer women had to look for primitive methods of abortion, which lead to various complications. The mortality among pregnant women became the highest of Europe during the reign of Ceausescu. While the childbed mortality rate kept declining over the years in neighbouring countries, in Romania it increased to more than ten times of that of its neighbours.
Relatively many children who were born in this period became malnourished or were severely physically handicapped. Many of these children ended up in care under miserable conditions. The children born in this period, especially between 1966 and 1972, are nicknamed the decretei (pejorative name). They had to put up with crowded public services as the state was not ready for the sudden increase. |
The younger generations today simply don't have an understanding of back alley abortions. It really is a public health crisis. We hear the argument of I wouldn't be here today if my mom aborted me, but there are also many people who are alive and well today because abortion is legal. My mom nearly died from an illegal abortion many years before she had me.
The biggest problem I see is that making abortions illegal would not end abortions. I would not choose one for myself except for a life-threatening circumstance, but who am I to make that choice for someone else?
With the death penalty, I simply do not see the purpose other than revenge. It's not a deterrent. It doesn't make us safer. Add possible misjudgement, which we all acknowledge does occur, and I just can't understand why anyone would argue for it. I guess some people really like the eye-for-an-eye form of justice, but I don't.
I also see it as ironic that small government advocates have no problem giving the government the power of homicide, whether it's lawful or not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Spazzergasm
Who Fanatic
Joined: Sep 16, 2009
Age: 20
Posts: 4415
Location: Maine
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 5:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Vexcalibur wrote: |
Give me a trait, one trait that a) Applies exclusively to things we consider to be human beings (for example, try not to let them apply to a bunny) . b) Does not apply to sperm, ovules , or skin cells. c) Applies to a zygote. And I would change my mind. But I am actually being a cynic. Because I know that you won't come up with that trait, you will rather prefer to ignore this request and continue using loaded language like "baby" to describe an unborn fetus. |
Can't you tolerate some emotional words? They're not a logical fallacy or anything. (however, calling me bigoted is considered ad hominem).
It's not loaded to me, anyways. I believe it is a baby.
I'm not going to ignore your request. I'm going to think about it, and get back to you.
If I can't come up with a reason, I will still disagree with you, however, because you don't believe in absolute moral values, and I do. Without any other common ground, our arguing is meaningless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
AceOfSpades
Deeds not words
Joined: Feb 12, 2006
Posts: 3647
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| number5 wrote: | With the death penalty, I simply do not see the purpose other than revenge. It's not a deterrent. It doesn't make us safer. Add possible misjudgement, which we all acknowledge does occur, and I just can't understand why anyone would argue for it. I guess some people really like the eye-for-an-eye form of justice, but I don't.
I also see it as ironic that small government advocates have no problem giving the government the power of homicide, whether it's lawful or not. |
It may not be a deterrent but it is a preventative measure from the crook committing future crimes.
Death penalty pertains to national security and two of the most basic roles of Government are national and domestic security so the death penalty doesn't overstep the Government's role since it is within it.
| DW_a_mom wrote: | | I also consider it inconsistent for someone to call themselves pro-life but advocate for the death penalty. The death is killing done in all our names, even though I want no part in it. It is a political taking of life and, therefore, must be opposed through law. |
No, it is only logically inconsistent with your own underlying assumptions. To someone who has the underlying assumption that everyone is granted the right to life until they disregard the right to life of others, it is perfectly logical. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Tequila
Trust the people!
Joined: Feb 26, 2006
Posts: 26031
Location: Lancashire, UK
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AceOfSpades wrote: | | It may not be a deterrent but it is a preventative measure from the crook committing future crimes. |
Locking said crook up for the rest of his natural would pretty much have the same effect. |
|
| Back to top |
|
number5
Phoenix
Joined: Jun 16, 2009
Posts: 1691
Location: sunny philadelphia
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tequila wrote: | | AceOfSpades wrote: | | It may not be a deterrent but it is a preventative measure from the crook committing future crimes. |
Locking said crook up for the rest of his natural would pretty much have the same effect. |
Exactly. I don't see how the death part is necessary to national security at all. It seems like the epitome of cruel and unusual punishment. |
|
| Back to top |
|
donnie_darko
Phoenix
Joined: Nov 27, 2009
Age: 23
Posts: 1794
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| number5 wrote: |
Exactly. I don't see how the death part is necessary to national security at all. It seems like the epitome of cruel and unusual punishment. |
To many members of the human race, mercy is a foreign concept. |
|
| Back to top |
|
AceOfSpades
Deeds not words
Joined: Feb 12, 2006
Posts: 3647
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Tequila wrote: | | AceOfSpades wrote: | | It may not be a deterrent but it is a preventative measure from the crook committing future crimes. |
Locking said crook up for the rest of his natural would pretty much have the same effect. |
That crook could still call shots from behind bars, murder other inmates along with CO's, rape other inmates which will cause said inmates to become violent if they didn't previously have a propensity for violence, etc. Also overcrowding presents much more opportunities for violence to happen, adding insult to injury. |
|
| Back to top |
|
donnie_darko
Phoenix
Joined: Nov 27, 2009
Age: 23
Posts: 1794
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AceOfSpades wrote: |
Locking said crook up for the rest of his natural would pretty much have the same effect. |
That crook could still call shots from behind bars, murder other inmates along with CO's, rape other inmates which will cause said inmates to become violent if they didn't previously have a propensity for violence, etc. Also overcrowding presents much more opportunities for violence to happen, adding insult to injury.[/quote]
Ever heard of solitary confinement? |
|
| Back to top |
|
Dox47
Consigliere
Joined: Jan 29, 2008
Posts: 5177
Location: Seattle Area
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't believe in a state applied death penalty, it's ineffective, expensive, error prone and irreversible. This does not mean I don't think there are plenty of people out their who need killing, I just don't trust the state to do it properly.
As an aside, I posted this story in another thread to illustrate a point: http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/the-bravest-woman-in-seattle/Content?oid=8640991
This story really tested my anti death penalty principles, I've seldom wanted someone dead as much as the man who committed these crimes. Given the DNA evidence and confession, there is NO reasonable doubt present, and the crimes were certainly heinous enough to warrant death. With great difficulty I was able to retain my intellectual appraisal that we should not have a death penalty, even though my emotions were screaming for it in this case. It wasn't an easy call, but in the end I was able to overrule my emotions and remain rational. However, there was a part of me that fervently wished they'd let the guy go on a technicality, since my personal loophole is only against a state death penalty, but that's just a fantasy. Incidentally, he was found guilty and is looking at mandatory LWOP, which I suppose will have to do.
_________________
Unconditional allegiance is the surest way to render one’s beliefs and agenda irrelevant
Any power that government has to do something you like will invariably be used for something you abhor
Murum aries attigit |
|
| Back to top |
|
number5
Phoenix
Joined: Jun 16, 2009
Posts: 1691
Location: sunny philadelphia
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AceOfSpades wrote: | | Tequila wrote: | | AceOfSpades wrote: | | It may not be a deterrent but it is a preventative measure from the crook committing future crimes. |
Locking said crook up for the rest of his natural would pretty much have the same effect. |
That crook could still call shots from behind bars, murder other inmates along with CO's, rape other inmates which will cause said inmates to become violent if they didn't previously have a propensity for violence, etc. Also overcrowding presents much more opportunities for violence to happen, adding insult to injury. |
I don't think there's a correlation between death row inmates and higher rates of prison rape, brutality, etc. I think other violent offenders (not facing the death penalty) are just as likely to cause mayhem behind bars. Please feel free to correct me here if I'm wrong - haven't done the research.
As for overcrowding, I think there are around 3200 death row inmates right now in the US, give or take a few, and the total prison population is somewhere around 2.5 million. It's really a non-issue here. I vote for letting out the potheads, but that's just me.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
  |
Wrong Planet Autism Forum Index
-> Politics, Philosophy, and Religion
|
Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next
|
|
|
