PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Crime Debates
     Death Penalty

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 3 4 5 ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
fredguff

|     |       Report Post



Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Yeah, an innocent child and a serial rapist/murderer surely deserve the same fate in your eyes.
Isn't that precisely what is happening in God's eyes--only worse?  How does one explain the reasoning of a God that allows an innocent child to be brutally tortured and killed by a rapist/murderer?  
 


Posts: 162 | Posted: 1:10 PM on October 29, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quite simple, God gave you the right to "choose" for yourself what you will do.  The serial rapist and the abortionist will both be recompensed for the actions they chose to do while they live.  Those who suffer tribulation here on earth (unjustly) will be comforted.  But, if you've ever picked up a Bible, you already knew that and are just playing devil's advocate, I'm sure.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 4:19 PM on October 29, 2006 | IP
K8

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Many, if not most, of those who argue against abortion do so by preaching the sanctity of life. And yet, we see these very same people arguing FOR the death penalty saying that they can do so without being hypocritical because those on death row have somehow rendered the sanctity of their lives void.

Thus, what i would like explained to me is: what precisely must one do to render the sanctity of one's life void?

Is killing just one person enough? Or need it be 50?

Must you first kidnap/rape/torture your victim? Or will killing them quick and painlessly in their sleep still be enough?

Should it simply go to the public's disgust regarding particular crimes?

Should it go to the discretion of whatever judge you might get?

If someone can answer me this, then i will stop going on about the hypocrisy of those who are anti-abortion and pro-death panalty and of the legal system in general in regards to this punishment.

And again, can i stress, i have no sympathy whatsoever for those on death row - i just think it's terribly hypcritical for any legal system to kill people for killing others. It undermines the integrity of the system as a benchmark for the behavioural standards of a society.


 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 01:59 AM on October 30, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Have you ever, even once in your life, lied?  Are you going to teach your children not to lie even though that would be hypocritical of you?  And you pose a good question.  How many of your loved ones must someone brutally rape and murder before they've given up the very right that they've stolen from their victims?  And why are people up in arms (figuratively speaking of course) when a convicted MURDERER is forced to endure the same thing (although usually much more humanely) he put his victims through, but think it's none of your business that they are delivering a baby (and then before the whole thing manages to come out) just so they can poke a hole in its head and suck out its brains?  How is it hypocrisy to condemn the guilty and free the innocent?  Seriously?


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 6:06 PM on October 31, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I wonder how many of the people put to death have had complete undeniable evidence, as in they were found doing the act by an entire host of different people, to say that they did it?

Hmmm. Not many I'll wager.

So how many innocent people have died?

Hmmm. Quite a few I'd say.

And do we honestly know who we are allowing to play god? can you put you're hand on your heart and tell me that you are trusting a stranger to kill somebody?

Example: Saddaam Hussein, his crimes were horrific, yes. But so are Bush's and Blair's... and when are their public hangings?

If you're not of that political view what about Hitler... how many innocents did he put to death?

You cannot trust people just because they have power. They have the power to keep anything they choose from you.

Imprisonment is different, there can be appeals, retrials and so on. And before I didn't mean that we should only try people when there is that amount of evidence, because there is hardly ever that much evidence.

But we should not be able to kill them.

With the death penalty, its always too late - the last hanging in Britain is a perfect example.

And I thought the Christian way of thinking was that God is the only judge? I'm not Christian, but that's very hypocritical of you.


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 2:54 PM on November 5, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Actually, since you seem to "know what a Christian is" then you've actually read your bible and know what the bible has to say in regards to governments so I'm not sure what your point is unless you are playing dumb.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 7:21 PM on November 5, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

where exactly did you get that quote from?

the depths of your mind methinks.

Of course I havent read "my" Bible. Because I wouldn't want to and because I don't have one. My only statement was my opinion on the Christian way of thinking, which I began as "I thought...." not "It is...", and was more of a question than an actual statement, hence the question mark, thus leaving it open for disagreement and correction.

what's my point? maybe you should stop selectively reading my statements as I made several points that are really quite clear.


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 08:19 AM on November 6, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

How then can you call me hypocritical if you don't even know what God's thoughts are on the matter?


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 09:19 AM on November 6, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Out of pure interest then, what does the bible say about god being the only true judge?

It was my understanding that the bible does state this, but you are quite right I have not read the bible, I am just going by what I've learnt in R.E. etc which is why I put so many question marks when I was stating that point because I am unsure.

What I was stating is that, if I was correct in saying that the Bible states that god is the only judge, then you would be hypocritical. But only if I was correct in saying that.


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 09:49 AM on November 6, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Romans 13


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 11:06 AM on November 6, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I have never had a bible, or know of anyone that does, and have much more beneficial reading to do. So the chances of me reading "romans 13" slim to the point of non-existance.


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 11:42 AM on November 6, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You have my condolonces.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 12:34 PM on November 6, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Yes poor me. I'm so unfulfilled.

Actually I do now someone who is Christian, but I am at university so I couldn't look at his bible anyway.

He's the only christian i know, and he's bisexual and currently in a very happy relationship with another male.

How ironic.

Where were we? Ah yes, the right to kill other human beings who may or may not be innocent because it is our belief that this is right.

By the way, what do you think if new evidence comes up that proves a person is innocent after they've been put to death?


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 09:32 AM on November 7, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The same way I'd feel about any tragedy.  


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 10:00 AM on November 7, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Right. And yet you believe in the death penalty even though an innocent person is killed? If you vote FOR the death penalty doesnt that make you a murderer?

Why make it two murders when it could have been one? In what possible way is two murders better? What do we do about manslaughter when it can be very awkward to decide what exactly happened? What about when the criminal is somehow pychologically or mentally handicapped? Answers please.


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 1:18 PM on November 7, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Well, here in America I can't remember anyone ever receiving the death penalty on a manslaughter charge.  In the era of DNA evidence I'm skeptical that there are a large percentage of "innocent" people on death row, especially with the amount of appeals that are allowed them.  I can't speak for the judicial systems of other countries however.  Heck, planned parenthood aids in the deaths of, what?, thousands? of innocents each year.  The life of a serial killer (and name a serial killer in the past half decade that "didn't know" he could be put to death for his crimes) on the other hand pales in comparison, wouldn't you agree?


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 1:48 PM on November 7, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

So planned parenthood is a bad thing? If i ever, god forbid, think about sex but do not have sex, and therefore do not conceive, is that killing my unborn child?

If I use a pill or a comdom to prevent conception, is that murder?

A few clumps of cells that are wholly part of an actual human are not the same as a "legal homicide", or murdering a living breathing human to death but you know my views on that anyway.

Two wrongs do not make a right, didn't you get taught that in school?

Look at these two letters written to the Guardian newspaper, tell me what you think:



"There were at least 300 people at the prison gates as Clarence Ray Allen was executed at St Quentin jail. Many of your readers may have assumed that the people of California didn't care (Death penalty in US: Blind and frail killer, 75, to get lethal injection, January 13). There had been weeks of organising across the state to get Governor Schwarzenegger to grant a reprieve to this 76-year-old man who was blind, deaf and confined to a wheel chair. And though the crowd to provide "witness" to the execution was smaller than on previous occasions, this may be connected to the fact that a bill is pending in the California legislature for a moratorium on executions.

Opinion is moving across the nation, but especially in California. This is not some major moral change, but rather a recognition that innocent people are being executed. Also, it is being increasingly recognised that anybody who can afford to pay an attorney will avoid the death sentence and receive life imprisonment without parole. Californians are beginning to understand that we are executing poor people and people of colour. They see that our executions are discriminatory. Millions of Californians believe that the death penalty is barbaric. We continue to jail and execute poor people without looking at the underlying causes. The death penalty is used as simple revenge. We are working to bring this state and this nation in line with other nations where this cruel and damaging practice has been banned for decades."
From: Rev Dr Alan Jones
South Hayward United Methodist church, California, USA


"On Monday in San Quentin prison, Clarence Ray Allen suffered "legal homicide", being put to death by the state. He became the oldest person executed in California. Sixty years ago an illiterate black and tearful George Junius Stinney Jr, aged 14 years and 7 months, was strapped into the electric chair in a southern state to become the youngest person to be legally killed in the US during the 20th century. So diminutive was he that the straps required adjustment. On death row in Arizona now is LeRoy Nash, aged 90, and the authorities there appear to be hoping that he dies from natural causes, as it would be embarrassing to strap a nonagenarian on to the gurney and administer a cold-blooded lethal injection.

While the US supreme court has now decreed that the execution of individuals who are mentally ill must stop, and that juvenile offenders can no longer be put to death, loopholes exist. In Tennessee, Greg Thompson - diagnosed as bipolar and schizophrenic - has responded so well to a court-imposed regime of powerful anti-psychotic medications that the state now wants to kill him. The US is the only industrialised western nation that retains capital punishment. Is this an indicator of a "civilised" society?"

From:Brian Crowther
Leeds


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 3:03 PM on November 7, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

are you saying Clarence was innocent of his crimes?  are you saying he did not know that his crimes could result in the death penalty and then went ahead and did them anyway?  you really are the poster girl for "No Personal Responsibility" aren't you?  the rest of us live in the real world where there are real consequences for our actions.  if you aren't prepared to accept the responsibility for your actions, don't do the action.  is this clear enough for you?  Get pregnant... rear a child.  Kill someone... forfeit the very right you stole from someone else.  How you can stand their on your claims of killing the innocent and sparing the guilty and then call someone else a hypocrit, I can't fathom.  


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 3:23 PM on November 7, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I am saying no-one has a right to take another human life.

Punish them according to their crimes by imprisonment of course, they are a danger to the community.

You think a blind, deaf, wheelchair-bound 76 year old is a danger to you?

By the way if you had read the story properly he committed the crime in 1982, so yes he knew what his crimes would result in, and yes he deserved to be punished for them. I'm not disputing that.

But He has been punished by spending the remainder of his life in prison, why kill him? How will that BENEFIT anyone? That is the key word here: benefit. No good will come of killing him, so why do it? Give me one reason.

Jes Richardson, 57, told the Associated Press: "I pay taxes. I vote. It's murder and I feel because I'm a citizen of this state I'm indirectly responsible for that murder."

The only thing you re doing as Mr Richardson says is making murderers out of the tax-paying, voting public. Excellent.

NO. If you get pregnant, then you make a DECISION that will be benficial to YOUR life and therefore take responbility for yourself. Only when you are past the point of being able to terminate a pregnancy you then must take responsiblity for a baby as well.

"Forfeit the right" - so two wrongs mae a right? Two people die because of one persons behaviour?

No, you believe in unnecessary murder and putting females through unnecessary and unwanted trauma and damage.

Why should we decide who dies and who doesn't? Aren't all lives as important as each other?


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 4:07 PM on November 7, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

No, you believe in unnecessary murder and putting females through unnecessary and unwanted trauma and damage.



I thought we already agreed that it was "unnecessary and unwanted" but yet they decided to go ahead and do it anyway.  They made their choice.  If someone puts a bullet in a gun, spins the cylinder and pulls the trigger can we then yell "But I didn't want to shoot anyone!"  "Yes, I knew it might result in someone's death, but it's not what I meant to do so its not my fault!"  How ludicrous.  If you choose to do something, knowing the possible consequences of your actions you should be held responsible for them.  

Why should we decide who dies and who doesn't? Aren't all lives as important as each other?

Apparently so, unless you're their mother.  "I got pregnant, but I'm too lazy to take responsibility for my actions so I'll just have them poke a hole in the kids head and suck his brains out."  Family reunions at your house must be something special.



-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 7:43 PM on November 7, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

But the "consequences" should not be death. Yes I completely agee that murderers make a choice, and should serve the punishment for that choice, but the question is why should that punishment be death? You're avoiding the issue here.

And again you are putting females into one large collective group of idiots who have no differentiating circumstances, opinons, or any form of personlity at all seeing as that is the quote all mother's say once they're pregnant?

You are so clearly a chauvanist, have you actually listened to yourself? If I get pregnant tomorrow sue to whatever reason, be it because I was raped, or because my I forgot to the take my pill, or the pill was faulty, or the comdom split, or I simply did not use any contraception for whatever reason, then due to my personal circumstances I would then take responsiblity for my action and have an abortion because I do not want a child.

It is not late after the act of sex itself to take responsbility, it is when I am in the situation of being pregnant that I can also make a responsible action on behalf of myself, and only myself.

Also, you're argument does not account for rape.

Don't you dare bring my family into this. I am fighting for the rights of women, something I wish I did not have to do because I thought our rights were not under threat, but there are some old fashioned, blind chauvsnists out there who seem to still class women as second class citizens with no rights or minds of their own.

Even though I live in England where it is, if anything, becoming easier and more accepted to have an abortion, I'm really not going to stand by and see other countries make this horrific backtrack thorugh time, especially so called "developed" democracies. Which is why I am arguing in the first place.


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 06:29 AM on November 8, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Also "sucking the brains out", which I am assuming you mean an abortion which requires the surgical decompression of the fetus's head before evacuation, is only for very late abortions.


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 12:24 PM on November 8, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Let me put it into simple words since apparently there was no birds and bees talk in your house.  Men and women procreate by copulating (tab A into slot B, in case your not following).  When you copulate, you are committing the act which may result in the conception of a child.  If you do not wish to have a child, you do not copulate.  Kind of like if you don't want to die, you don't jump in front of a moving train.  If you do copulate (regardless of contraception), you may conceive a child.  Do you understand that this is how it works?  Don't want a child, don't have sex...  Was that monosyllabic enough for you?


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 9:35 PM on November 8, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

And to correlate that with the actual topic at hand.  If you know the punishment for killing people is death, don't kill people.  Duh.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 9:36 PM on November 8, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

My parents have taught me about sex, including everything from contraception to abortions. All of the options, since they do not assume I am some kind of saint-like figure who never makes mistakes like YOU so obviously are. How wonderful to be a prime example of humanity such as yourself, to never make mistakes, to have such black and white views about the world that make everything so simple....

Except of course, I would never ever want to be like you.

Do not patronise me. Fair enough give me your argument, you are entitled to it, but do not assume that because I do not share your view I am obviously inferior to you and your perfect life. Because, mate, thats just not true now is it? And I think you know that just as much as I do but obviously it is easier for you to treat me like a child because that makes you feel really really good about yourself doesnt it. I hate snide t***ts.

And you are ignoring every single word I say anyway, so what is the point??

You keep saying the same thing over and over and over again and its really getting quite dull. "do not have sex blah blah blah"

When are you going to learn that people do? That it is a natural part of life? That's why we have sexual organs, why we get urges (except I'm sure you have never got an urge in your life, being so perfect and all, you probably just pray until it goes away)

So then we must educate people on dealing with sex.

But PEOPLE MAKE MISTAKES. IT HAPPENS. Of course it would be better if no-one got urges and no-one had sex until marriage and no-one had unwanted pregnancies but they do, face facts, it is what happens.

And before you say it, the urge to kill someone is not a natural urge, it is entirely different.

And yes, you should not kill if you know what the punsihment is.

But AGAIN as i have ALREADY SAID the punishment should NOT BE DEATH.

Get it now?

Or was that not monosyllabic enough for you, oh epitome of mankind...

(Edited by jenns 11/9/2006 at 07:55 AM).


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 07:54 AM on November 9, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I don't recall ever saying that I don't make mistakes, but thank you for projecting your prejudices on to me.  And right and wrong is black and white (or else it wouldn't be right and wrong).  I also don't ever remember calling you inferior, so please keep your insecurities out of our discussion.  Obviously people would make less mistakes if there were REAL consequences behind them, but in our "I'm the victim" society that we live in today we can't expect anyone to actually take responsibility for their actions so we kill innocent children so we don't have to deal with the consequences of our actions on one hand and we slap murderers on the wrist and say "bad! go sit in the corner" so we can feel good about ourselves on the other.  It must be nice to have such a nicely seared conscience, but alas some of us still try to fight for morals.  Sure, it makes us targets, but someone has to speak for the dead victims and innocent children who can't speak for themselves.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 7:59 PM on November 9, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Project my prejudices? Don't make me laugh. I simply assumed that since you do not allow others to make mistakes then you can never make any yourself.

Is that incorrect then?

Ahhh so you do make mistakes. So why is it ok for you to do it and not for others? Thats a bit prejudiced as you say.

Are you being sarcastic when you right and wrong is black and white? There really is no hope if you think that, none at all.

No you did not call me inferior, but your tone implied I was. And I'm not going to sit back and let you treat me like a child - which by the way if anything makes you insecure about your own arguments - so I pointed it out to you.

ANYWAY.

Slapping murderers on the wrist is not quite the same as jail is it. And abortions aren't killing innocent children are they. Maybe you need to get a grip on reality.

Yes you're right though, it does make me feel good about myself that it's not on my conscience that someone died because of me. We do not have the death penalty in Britain, and therefore have no huge disagreements and controversies about imprisonment, and this has been the way since the for around 40 years or so and no problems have arisen.

Definitely no more innocent people have died i know that much.

And we have legal abortions, 74% of Britons think that this is a good thing. Women have rights, etc etc and no-one complains.

I'm not saying Britain is wonderful by any means, but I have come to take for granted that as I woman I have contraceptive rights and that I do not have the unnecessary deaths of victims on my hands.

"dead victims" - who do you mean by that? the murderers on death row? No you're right they really can't speak for themselves, sometimes not even before their death, especially when they're poor and can't afford an attorney so therefore have pretty much sentenced themselves already.

What is it with only sentencing the poor to suffering?



-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 4:22 PM on November 10, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

How is abortion a "contraceptive right"?  I understand that "American" English and the "Queen's" English don't always go hand in hand (guys, never ask for a napkin in Britain), but in America contraception means "tending or serving to prevent conception or impregnation."  I always though abortion happened after pregnancy.  If I got that wrong, I really don't understand women (and I'll have to have a serious talk with my anatomy & physiology professor, boy does she have things confused).

And how am I not "allowing" people to make mistakes?  I'm simply asking for them to accept the responsibility of those mistakes.  If you have a child, don't kill it.  That's not accepting responsibility.  Imagine if your mother decided she'd made a mistake and she is now going to "accept responsibility" (by your standards) and blow your head off... I think you'd agree that this would have absolutely NOTHING to do with "accepting responsibility" which is really what the point has been all along.

Also, if you are implying that right and wrong is not black and white, how then can you define what is right and wrong?  And if you say that you can't define what is right and wrong, how then can you punish anyone for doing anything?  If nothing is right and wrong, then everything is acceptable, including murder, rape, pillaging, or is that what you're saying?

Lastly, never assume and don't infer what was never implied.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 5:05 PM on November 10, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Hahaa - you need to be British to know what the "Queen's English" actually means!! Let's just say very very few British people speak like that anymore unless you name is Lord something or other.

Whats a napkin in America out of interest?

Anyway, on with the debate...

No abortion is not literally contraception, because conception has already occurred, but I think of it as contraception because it prevents a full term pregnancy, but sorry I should have made myself more clear on that one.

Yes. Ask them to take responsibility... and one of the ways of taking responsibility is to have an abortion. Because you feel it would be irresponsible to carry through the pregnancy for whatever reason, and surely the woman is the only person that knows whether she is ready for a child or not.

My mother blowing my head off, which is delightfully put, is not the same. A foetus cannot survive outside the uterus. I was outside my mother's uterus 19 years ago, therefore I am no longer part of her body, I do not need her body to survive. As soon as a child does not need the woman's body to survive, then yes, it is murder. But when it is part of you, and only really a collection of cells, then it is up to YOU what you do with it. It is your body. We do not plant sperm and eggs in the earth then one day a baby grows up. It is part of something else, an actual human being.

You cannot always define what is "right" and what is "wrong". It is not that simple. We would not be having this debate now if it was as simple as that. There is to what degree it is right/wrong, the reason for it being right/wrong and so on. We cannot just lump them into two catagories.

For example, murder is wrong. But what about when a wife impulsively stabs her husband before he breaks another one of her bones or harms her child? Is she "wrong"?

I am not saying there is no such thing as right and wrong. When did I say that? Don't infer what was never implied :P


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 06:46 AM on November 11, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

First, I didn't infer it.  I was unsure what you were trying to say based on how you said it, which is why I asked it in the form of a question.  

Second, self-defense is not murder by its very definition.  Ergo, murder is wrong.  Self-defense is not.  There is no degree of right and wrong involved.

Third, in the US if you ask for a napkin you'll probably get a little piece of paper folded up (although if you're at a nice enough place you'll get a linen) that you can wipe your hands or face with if you manage to be messy.

Lastly, as this doesn't seem to be making any progress, I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree on whether murdering your unborn child is "accepting resposibility" for it or not.  I tend to think that accepting responsibility for your child is rearing, teaching it, protecting it.  For you it is, apparently, killing it and pretending it never happened.  I can't agree with that.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 10:15 AM on November 11, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Yes ok I think it's wise to agree to disagree on that, I'm not going to re-think my views on it either as I believe that yes, some women may want to pretend it never happened for whatever reason, and that it is not murder because a foetus is not a child. But I completely agree with your view of taking responsibility for your child... once it is outside the uterus.

But anyway, leaving that one there I think before I start another rant.

But it is still murder. The courts may still see it as murder. I don't care if it's self-defence, the end result was a murder. And you say that murder=wrong. You cannot have it both ways in a black and white world, either it is wrong or it isn't.

Which is what I mean by the danger of having black and white views on the world, as nothing is black and white. There is always more to it than that. If it was that simple it would easier obviously, but life is never easy.


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 3:05 PM on November 11, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Actually, it is a homicide.  Murder, by definition, involves intent and an inability to be justfied.  Homicide makes no determination of intent or justification.  If the self-defence was justifiable and the intent is determined to be self-defense rather than to kill the attacker then it is considere a justifiable homicide, not a murder.  The law does NOT consider it murder (at least not in the States).


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 3:21 PM on November 11, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

But do you see my point how nothing is ever as simple as "right" and "wrong"?

To use a slightly frivolous example, in the film Donnie Darko where the teacher is asking the pupils to put everyday examples of life into two catagories of human emotion, and Donnie states:

"But you're not listening to me. There are other things that need to be taken into account here. Like the whole spectrum of human emotion. You can't just lump everything into these two categories and then just deny everything else!"

I think this demonstrates why we can't lump things into 2 catagories, life is too complex, and it is denying everything else.


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 7:21 PM on November 11, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Apples and oranges.  There are more than two emotions.  Right and wrong are specific.  You can't have something that's a little right AND a little wrong.  Anything that can be labeled right or wrong is one or the other, never both, never something else.  People invent "grey areas" so that they can do what they know is wrong and still justify it to themselves so they can sleep at night.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 7:38 PM on November 11, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"There is nothing more likely to drive a man mad, than the being unable to get rid of the idea of the distinction between right and wrong."
-William Hazlitt

Our perceptions of right and wrong at the end of the day come down to our knowledge, values, attitudes and beliefs. Therefore your ideas of what is right and wrong are completely different to mine, because our KVABs are different. In this way, what is right and what is wrong can never be agreed upon, and are not black and white.

I have difficulty putting something into one catagory or the other, as humans are too complex for everything to be placed into these two catagories.

"People invent "grey areas" so that they can do what they know is wrong and still justify it to themselves so they can sleep at night."

And people say something is right so they can do what they know is wrong and still justify it to themselves so they can sleep at night.

Like murdering abortion doctors, like the death penalty, like the murder of 655,000 Iraqis.

I do not perceive these things as "right", I believe they are very much wrong, and but for whatever reason people label these things right and just. Right and wrong are just too flexible to be set in stone.


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 05:39 AM on November 12, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Right and wrong are in stone.  Too many people try and move the stones because they don't like where they are.  Or make up fake stones and put them where they like.  


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 09:05 AM on November 12, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

But its all down to perception. YOUR ideas of right and wrong may well be set in stone, as in homosexuality is wrong, abortion is wrong and so on. But not everyone agrees with this and it may not be the case, so you cannot generalise.

Racism is "wrong" but there was a time when the majority believed discrimination based on race to be "right". But most of us now believe that is wrong. Nothing is set in stone.


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 10:46 AM on November 12, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Racism has never been right, despite people's perceptions.  That's the point.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 4:27 PM on November 12, 2006 | IP
jenns

|     |       Report Post



Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

"There is no such as thing as right and wrong, just popular opinion"


-------
theres no fun in fundamentalism
 


Posts: 64 | Posted: 10:11 AM on November 13, 2006 | IP
K8

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from EMyers at 6:06 PM on October 31, 2006 :
Have you ever, even once in your life, lied?  Are you going to teach your children not to lie even though that would be hypocritical of you?  And you pose a good question.  How many of your loved ones must someone brutally rape and murder before they've given up the very right that they've stolen from their victims?  And why are people up in arms (figuratively speaking of course) when a convicted MURDERER is forced to endure the same thing (although usually much more humanely) he put his victims through, but think it's none of your business that they are delivering a baby (and then before the whole thing manages to come out) just so they can poke a hole in its head and suck out its brains?  How is it hypocrisy to condemn the guilty and free the innocent?  Seriously?


Sorry - missed the part where you answered my question.

Question: How do we decide which criminals deserve to die? i.e. who is it "right" (there's that word again...) to kill?

Again, must they kill more than one person?

Must they torture them first?

Must they have no remorse?

Must they be a dangerous psychopath who'll simply kill again & again?

Clearly, unless there is a logical and objective way of determining when exactly someone has forfeited their right to life, hence making it "right" to kill them, the death penalty cannot be justified.

And, to throw in another topic altogether, what of those countries who hand down the death penalty to drug traffickers? Justified or not? Have they forfeited their right to life satisfactorily so as to make it "right" to kill them?

Or is the U.S. the only one thats got it right?

 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 07:56 AM on November 14, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

So, if I killed you, I wouldn't be wrong, I'd just be unpopular?

Answer: it is decided by the government that is put into power by the people to protect them.  Personally, I'd think it would only take one act of pre-meditated murder to qualify for the death penalty.  And since life is obviously so unimportant to the murderer that he didn't mind taking it from someone else, it shouldn't really bother him (her) if it were required of him.  

Now you are free to answer the questions I posed to you.


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 8:49 PM on November 14, 2006 | IP
K8

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from EMyers at 6:06 PM on October 31, 2006 :
Have you ever, even once in your life, lied?  Are you going to teach your children not to lie even though that would be hypocritical of you?  And you pose a good question.  How many of your loved ones must someone brutally rape and murder before they've given up the very right that they've stolen from their victims?  And why are people up in arms (figuratively speaking of course) when a convicted MURDERER is forced to endure the same thing (although usually much more humanely) he put his victims through, but think it's none of your business that they are delivering a baby (and then before the whole thing manages to come out) just so they can poke a hole in its head and suck out its brains?  How is it hypocrisy to condemn the guilty and free the innocent?  Seriously?


It's hypocrisy if your argument against abortion is one which involves the 'sanctity of life' and yet when it comes to a convicted criminal, all of a sudden that 'sanctity' disappears in favour of a "kill them all" revenge mentality.

You imply that this 'sanctity' becomes void once someone commits the act of murder, yet this requires some form of assessment as to what exactly one must do in order for their life to mean nothing. As there is no set criteria, it comes down to subjective public opinion usually influenced by the ugly desire for revenge.

That, to me, is no way for a legal system to decide who deserves to live and who deserves to die.

 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 11:59 PM on November 27, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

So then, to avoid hypocrisy, you abhor abortion?  And what, pray tell, is your answer to murderers?  More prisons?


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 08:15 AM on November 28, 2006 | IP
EntwickelnCollin

|        |       Report Post



Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

And what, pray tell, is your answer to murderers?  More prisons?


That's how we do it in Minnesota. My county's jail is overcrowded with prisoners from a neighboring county, but not because there are too many murderers there who would otherwise be kept in prison for another ten years anyway and later, if ever, killed. Most prisoners haven't committed crimes worthy of the death penalty. If they had, Texas wouldn't have very many prisoners.


-------
http://ummcash.org/officers.html
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/wow_1.php
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/08/a_triumphant_beginning.php
We're official!
 


Posts: 729 | Posted: 2:28 PM on November 29, 2006 | IP
K8

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from EMyers at 08:15 AM on November 28, 2006 :
So then, to avoid hypocrisy, you abhor abortion?  And what, pray tell, is your answer to murderers?  More prisons?


I'm afraid not.

My argument against the death penalty has nothing to do with life or its "sanctity" - rather, its to do with the fact that the death penalty is an incredibly hypocritical (there's that word again...) practice on behalf of the legal system.

To proclaim murder as the worst of crimes and then turn around and kill someone for committing it is hypocritical. Such a practice undermines the integrity of the legal system and its role as the voice of reason and fairness within society.

I really couldn't care less about the criminals.

I'm just surprised by those who are against abortion and yet for the death penalty, especially when it comes to the "sanctity of life" argument and the fact that the New Testament pretty obviously overrules the teachings of the Old Testament regarding death as a punishment. There appears to be some fairly selective reading going on when it comes to this topic.

That's what I wonder about.  

 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 01:43 AM on December 9, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

If you see that as hypocrisy, how then can you be for abortion, but against the death penalty?  How can you be for the killing of the innocent, but against the killing of the guilty?  What dictionary are you getting your definition of hypocrisy from?


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 08:42 AM on December 10, 2006 | IP
K8

|      |       Report Post




Regular
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

You'll see I've already explained why I'm against the death penalty - nothing to do with the life of the criminal, just the threat it poses to the integrity of any legal system that practises it.

I've been saying that there are many out there who argue against abortion using the "sanctity of life" stance, while at the same time supporting the death penalty. That's what I'm saying is hypocritical.

Unless someone can explain to me how exactly a person can cause the "sanctity" of their life to become void, it's hypocritical to argue against abortion saying all life is sacred and then turn around and support the killing of a convicted criminal.

That's one of my many problems with the arguments of those in favour of the death penalty.

There's also the issue of the New Testament vs Old Testament when it comes to the death penalty - SO many Christians seem to be for the death penalty, and yet there is SO much evidence to suggest that the Bible doesn't support it ANYMORE.


 


Posts: 292 | Posted: 01:09 AM on December 17, 2006 | IP
EMyers

|     |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

And yet you don't understand why it's hypocritical to argue the exact opposite?


-------
"Thou believest that God is one; thou does well: the demons also believe, and shudder." James 2:19 - Belief is never enough.
 


Posts: 1287 | Posted: 08:02 AM on December 21, 2006 | IP
crazygerman123

|     |       Report Post




Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

In 1998, the most recent year for which data are available from the Bureau of Justice Statistics(that i could find), 6,530 people escaped or were AWOL from state prisons.

Now ask yourselves this question, Could you sleep at night better knowing the person that killed 3 of your family members is locked up in jail, ( considering 6,530 people escaped from prison) or that that guy is rotting somewhere else... some prison you cannot escape from....- hell.

Sure, that may no be that many considering that 2 million people or so are in prison, but what if that guy was in that 6 thousand?
You all know as well as i do you would be frightened for your safety.

btw i have a debate on this this thursday so iff you have any pros for me pls do.


-------
im having a debate on the death penalty, and im am on the Pro- side, so if you have any info that may help me please do.
 


Posts: 1 | Posted: 11:53 PM on January 8, 2007 | IP
SilverStar

|        |       Report Post




Junkie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

The death penalty also acts as a deterrent. You may be less likely to murder some one if you know that you will go to the guillotine.


-------
Darkside Enterprises were the impossible meets possible.

Tread softy and carry a big stick, preferably an AT4
 


Posts: 681 | Posted: 7:54 PM on January 10, 2007 | IP
    
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 3 4 5 ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
Multiple pages for this topic [ 1 2 3 4 5 ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.