• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Death Penalty: For or Against

Death Penalty: For or Against

  • For

    Votes: 40 57.1%
  • Against

    Votes: 30 42.9%

  • Total voters
    70
Yeah the only diference being that the child did nothing to deserve to die. The CRIMINAL probably did something to deserve to did. A child shouldn't die due to the miscalculations of two people who weren't thinking. I understand rape and incest is another thing, but.....
 
I have to agree with Mr. America. The death penalty can set examples of what happens when you kill, rape etc...It also ends the problem completely so that the person has no concievable means of ever commiting the crime again. How many repeat offenders are there? We just can't keep building jails, filling them to capacity and not afford to feed CRIMINALS. look at California. They have to shut jails down and let convicted criminals go free because there are not enough jails to house them. Why should a criminal get a warm place to be with three squares a day and all the other "amenaties" that are in jail (library, excersise, tv etc). Thats BS :mad:
 
That's just jaded. You didn't even read my post. And another thing, you said rape or incest is a different case, its still murder isn't it? You still contridict yourself.
 
Since when can anyones opinion have no exceptions. I can't figure out why anyone would put a criminal on the same level as a baby that hasn't been born yet?
 
JDaly1978 said:
I have to agree with Mr. America. The death penalty can set examples of what happens when you kill, rape etc...It also ends the problem completely so that the person has no concievable means of ever commiting the crime again. How many repeat offenders are there? We just can't keep building jails, filling them to capacity and not afford to feed CRIMINALS. look at California. They have to shut jails down and let convicted criminals go free because there are not enough jails to house them. Why should a criminal get a warm place to be with three squares a day and all the other "amenaties" that are in jail (library, excersise, tv etc). Thats BS :mad:

During World War II, military basic training camps sprung up like mushrooms, generally in relatively remote areas. Of course, not all of the conscripts and volunteers obeyed the rules.

So there was a need to confine these folks. Every training facility had an area known as 'the stockade'. It usually consisted of nothing more than a barbed wire enclosure that encircled a sparse barracks and was patrolled by MPs and, in some instances, guard dogs. These 'accommodations' housed the miscreants and kept them under control.

In addition to the minor offenses, some of these folks were locked up while they were awaiting court martial for serious offenses such as rape and murder.

If there are overcrowding conditions at the existing pokeys today, why can't those who are short timers, non-violent types, and the like, be housed, on the cheap, the same way that worked so well sixty years ago? Look at all the problems that would be solved.
 
JDaly you actually haven't made a point, or even fought my argument. You just keep claiming that "criminals aren't the same as babies." You can't be for and against murder when it's convienient. Well the child has done nothing wrong so its wrong to kill the baby, however the criminal has done something wrong and lets kill him, forget the fact that murder is wrong.

That logic doesn't work.

As I said, I am pro-abortion and pro-capital punishment. The logic works out in my head. For example, you can't be for taxing people but against paying taxes yourself. What would you be?
A hypocrite.
 
Explain why you think an unborn child should die due to the miscalculations of two stupid people vs. a criminal that, lets say, raped and killed a 12 year old girl.

You think both should die. Why? How is that logic? Just because you'd be willing to send a criminal to the electric chair, that justifies killing an unborn life?

Secondly, Im not here to bicker back and forth to you. You have your opinion, and I have mine. Im not here to change yours.
 
heyjoeo said:
JDaly you actually haven't made a point, or even fought my argument. You just keep claiming that "criminals aren't the same as babies." You can't be for and against murder when it's convienient. Well the child has done nothing wrong so its wrong to kill the baby, however the criminal has done something wrong and lets kill him, forget the fact that murder is wrong.

That logic doesn't work.

As I said, I am pro-abortion and pro-capital punishment. The logic works out in my head. For example, you can't be for taxing people but against paying taxes yourself. What would you be?
A hypocrite.

My position: My preference to the death penalty is 'life without parole' and that Roe v Wade be overturned.

That said, it seems to me that you make no allowances for differences; an innocent child in the womb, versus an guilty adult person duly convicted of a capital crime.

What is it that justifies tarring both with the same brush?
 
I'd still like to know what puts an unborn child (who does not deserve to die) and a criminal on the same playing feild??? That just confuses the sh** out of me??!! :mad:

Like Ive said...Incest ...rape..that MAY be one thing...but violently ending a life without giving it a chance because of a F*** up is unacceptable in my book. There is NO corelation between the two circumstances. :mad:
 
Wow OK BOTH of you are not understanding my argument. MURDER IS MURDER. Whether its a criminal, or a freaking unborn baby. Personlly, I'm not sure if a "unborn" baby is alive (the term unborn generally means its not however). BUT if you believe that, and you think abortion is murdering that child, then you CANNOT be pro-capital punishment. Fant, clearly you prefer life in prison w/out parole, that ISN'T being hypocritical because you aren't saying "murder the bastard!" However, JDaly continuously repeats himself, and makes up the accusation that I think a baby should be put on the same level as a criminal.

However, YOU do not have the choice of who does or does not deserve to die. Unless you sit on that jury, or you are the mother of the child, YOU DO NOT. There is a CORRELATION between them because of both of them being human beings (granted if you believe an unborn baby is a human being).

I AM NOT TARRING THEM BOTH WITH THE SAME BRUSH. Stop getting that idea! Do you guys even speak the english language? Here I'll use your argument against you. An unborn child that doesn't deserve to die, right? What if you have a "criminal" who is falsely accused and sentenced to death. However, he does not do anything wrong. He is killed. Is that right? Doesn't that person have the same right to live?

This is why I shouldn't discourse with stupid people...
 
Excellent logic Heyjoeyo. There is no end to hypocracy, especially when it comes to views from the Catholic church. Two weeks from today, the great State of Connecticut is scheduled to put a serial killer to death. It is the first execution in over 45 years in this state (sort of the "anti-Texas"). The real difficulty here is that the condemned guy wants to be executed and the state is moving ahead as scheduled. The really funny thing is that the Quinnapiac University Poll (highly respected for accuracy), found that the general population of CT agreed with the US population and were pro-death penalty (58%), BUT when they polled the CT Catholic population they found that 71% were PRO DEATH PENALTY, but 80% ANTI ABORTION.

Because of your frustration, I will give you two of my favorite quotes as a gift:

"Never argue with an idiot, observers might not be able to tell the two of you apart" - William F. Buckley

"Never try to teach a pig to sing, it wastes your time and it annoys the pig" - Contrarian
 
heyjoeo said:
Wow OK BOTH of you are not understanding my argument. MURDER IS MURDER. Whether its a criminal, or a freaking unborn baby.
The law correctly recognizes several levels of homicide. Although the victim is just as dead in all three categories, the penalties differ for premeditated murder, manslaughter, vehicular homicide, etc. Before abortion was legalized, a doctor was charged under a separate category.
Personlly, I'm not sure if a "unborn" baby is alive (the term unborn generally means its not however).
Don't you think it's about time that you made an effort to learn the truth and remove any doubt from your mind? You would then be far better equipped to defend your position.
BUT if you believe that, and you think abortion is murdering that child, then you CANNOT be pro-capital punishment.
That's the beauty of America. Anyone can be pro or con anything with no requirement to have any knowledge of the subject.
Fant, clearly you prefer life in prison w/out parole, that ISN'T being hypocritical because you aren't saying "murder the bastard!" However, JDaly continuously repeats himself, and makes up the accusation that I think a baby should be put on the same level as a criminal.
I don't tell you what to think, I just offer the proof that causes me to support my position. However, If you re-read your posts, you may get the feeling that you have referred to treating criminals and unborn babies to the same fate.
However, YOU do not have the choice of who does or does not deserve to die. Unless you sit on that jury, or you are the mother of the child, YOU DO NOT. There is a CORRELATION between them because of both of them being human beings (granted if you believe an unborn baby is a human being).

I AM NOT TARRING THEM BOTH WITH THE SAME BRUSH. Stop getting that idea! Do you guys even speak the english language? Here I'll use your argument against you. An unborn child that doesn't deserve to die, right? What if you have a "criminal" who is falsely accused and sentenced to death. However, he does not do anything wrong. He is killed. Is that right? Doesn't that person have the same right to live?
The following quote, from your earlier post is what caused me to make the comment about 'tarring both with the same brush'.

"As I said, I am pro-abortion and pro-capital punishment."

Did I read you incorrectly?

I agree with your point about innocent persons being convicted and sentenced to death. Especially since more than 300 death row inmates were later found to be not guilty and released since the death penalty was reinstated. I wonder how many others who were not guilty were not so fortunate?

This is one of the reasons I believe that life without parole should be the maximum sentence in capital cases.

As far as abortion is concerned, now that the total number since Roe v. Wade is approaching 50 million in the US, I would appreciate someone citing a few scientific or medical facts that justify this monumental and tragic loss of human resources.
This is why I shouldn't discourse with stupid people...
Most folks believe that when the opponent begins to toss insults around, it is a sure sign that his argument has run out of steam.
 
Both of you have some very salient points (neither one "stupid", quite the contrary), but the fact is, as Fantasea points out, there are various interpretations of "Murder". Hence, Murder in the first degree etc. If one choose to seek and "intellectually consistent" point of view, or one that is consistent with certain religious doctrine, it would be expected that they would be pro or con equally on both capital punishment and abortion. For a rational thinking American, the issues can be seperated intellectually and emotionally. For the religious community, I believe the dicotomy arises from the fire and brimstone school of the bible that directs the followers to seek and "eye for an eye" mentality. Afterall, it is a benevolent, respecting of all life type god who tells his flock> vengence is mine, sayeth the Lord, or stone your neighbor to death for working on the sabbath... and I can go on and on. Thou shalt not kill... except if I say so kinda god. But it is the root of inconsistency in church dogma... I guess god was the original flip/flopper, not Kerry heh?

As far as abortion goes, Fantasea quotes 50 million as an incredible loss of human resources which I find interesting. First, a fetus is a PREQUEL to life since it cannot exist on its own, it is merely a clump of cells that one day can go on to becoming a human being. Theoretically any cell of the body can be cloned and manipulated to become a baby. What I'm hearing could be compared to haphazard loss of sperm (living cells that if treated in a certain way lead to a baby) in the backseat of a Chevy as murder? Ova, which missed their chance at fertilization (same cellular status) are a lost human resource opportunity? I think not. It is still as "sin" for Catholics to practice birth control, because the underlying belief is just that. So what would be next if we let that train of thought carry through... the CONDOM POLICE? How about arresting every adolescent boy who holds a Playboy in one hand while killing off thousands of sperm with the other?

For those that are so concerned with saving the lives of "unborn babies" I suggest a simple PUT UP OR SHUT UP solution. If they feel that strongly about not allowing abortions they should ADOPT all of those babies instead of walking picket lines or even killing doctors (figure that one out?). Pay all the medical expenses for the mother, pre-natal and post natal care, support the kid for life, pay college tuition etc. If they are not willing to take on the responsibility, they shouldn't try to dictate to another person what choices they make.
 
Death Penalty: For It

After all the dna has been checked to remove any doubt the death penalty should be administered as a PUNISHMENT. It really IS a deterent if you think about it. I have never known anyone that was executed to come back and kill, rob or kidnap and kill anyone. The key here is when the dna removes ANY doubt that the person convicted is guilty. :eek:
 
We got your message that murder is murder...You are starting to sound like a broken record yourelf! :rolleyes:

What I was saying is that Because one believes in capital punishment, that the should be for abortion, which is a silly assertion. And I am pro capital punishment and 110% against abortion. Makes perfect sense to me. ;)
 
Jack, you are absolutely correct about DNA technology. Another example of truth through science. It convicts the guilty and is freeing the innocent... except for those who were executed before they had the benefit of a test.

JDaly - I also agree that it is possible to be pro- death penalty and anti-abortion on intellectual and/or emotional grounds. The problem I have is with the religious hypocracy of many believers who envoke the word of god to fit an the agenda du jour. You can't be holyer than thou one minute, then screaming for blood the next and be consistent religiously.

Enough of this... it's cocktail time :party
 
Im not overtly religous. but some people cannot come to the fact that you can think pro capital punnishment and anti abortion. I concur! Lets party! :cool:
 
Jack Dawson said:
I am for capital punishment and against abortion as well.

No one is "for" abortion.

There's no comparison between abortion and capital punishment.
Two different things.

I can understand how someone could be for capital punishment, and still be against abortions.

It's a personal decision.

Just as abortion should be a personal decision.

The right is always crying about keeping big government out of our lifes, and yet, every proposal by the right, threatens bigger and more intrusive government.

Can someone explain this to me?

Hoot
 
I have to keep repeating myself because people don't listen.

Personally, The world and I aren't ready to decide whether or not a fetus is a living HUMAN.

You were saying manslaughter and different kinds of murder, but if the act is KILLING the other and you are the KILLER you are comitting 1st degree murder (wheter you be the doctor or the serial killer, yet again taking into the consideration that a fetus is a human being).

QUOTE:
That's the beauty of America. Anyone can be pro or con anything with no requirement to have any knowledge of the subject.

That's like having a building that has no supports. What does it do? It crashes down.

I like your solution there Contrarian. Make the people whining put up the cash for the baby to give it that chance at "living."

Last time I checked we don't like in communism or socialism, the world ain't fair. Every kid is going to grow up in a different enviroment. So please do not make the argument "oh well the parents are entitled to raising their kid and not aborting them because they won't have a fair chance." Get over it, life is unfair.
 
Because Republicans have mastered the art of controlling the masses. Their policies and words never match up.
 
Contrarian said:
Excellent logic Heyjoeyo. There is no end to hypocracy, especially when it comes to views from the Catholic church.
Perhaps a little clarification would be in order so that all will understand your point of reference. Are you stating that the views to which you are about to refer are the official views of the hierarchy of the Catholic Church as expressed through the Archbishop of the Archdiocese of Hartford, His Excellency, Henry Joseph Mansell? If so, please so state. If not, please so state. You wouldn't want to cause confusion through misinformation, would you?
Two weeks from today, the great State of Connecticut is scheduled to put a serial killer to death. It is the first execution in over 45 years in this state (sort of the "anti-Texas"). The real difficulty here is that the condemned guy wants to be executed and the state is moving ahead as scheduled.
What's the beef with freedom of choice in this instance? ;)
The really funny thing is that the Quinnapiac University Poll (highly respected for accuracy), found that the general population of CT agreed with the US population and were pro-death penalty (58%), BUT when they polled the CT Catholic population they found that 71% were PRO DEATH PENALTY, but 80% ANTI ABORTION.

Oops! Got it wrong again, twice, didn't you? You first laid the responsibility upon the Catholic Church, next you lay the responsibility on 'the CT Catholic population. A cut & paste from the Quinnipiac website follows. One thing that most pollsters never consider when a person 'admits' to being Catholic is that while he may have been baptized as an infant, as many millions are, he may have allowed his faith to lapse, as many millions have done, which If anything, 'taints' the results with respect to Catholics. In any event, the poll seems to show that those who responded to poll who claimed Catholicity are pretty much in step with the rest of the Connecticutans, or whatever they're called.

Connecticut voters back death penalty, but more prefer life without parole, Quinnipiac University Poll finds

Wednesday, Jan. 12, 2004

When asked whether they favor or oppose the death penalty, Connecticut voters favor it 59 – 31 percent, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today. When offered the alternative, however, of life in prison with no chance of parole, voters prefer the life option over the death penalty 49 – 37 percent.

In the favor/oppose question, men favor the death penalty 65 – 27 percent, while women favor it 54 – 35 percent. Republicans are 71 – 23 percent in favor of the death penalty, with Democrats in favor 48 – 43 percent and independent voters in favor 62 – 27 percent, the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University poll finds.

Catholics favor the death penalty 66 – 26 percent, with Protestants in favor 58 – 31 percent.

Looking at the specific case of Michael Ross, Connecticut voters favor the death penalty 70 – 23 percent.

Because of your frustration, I will give you two of my favorite quotes as a gift:

"Never argue with an idiot, observers might not be able to tell the two of you apart" - William F. Buckley
Attribution is honorable.

"Never try to teach a pig to sing, it wastes your time and it annoys the pig" - Contrarian
Plagiarism is naughty. This one has been around for many years.
 
Hoot said:
Just as abortion should be a personal decision.
I think the decision is a bit too personal for the child involved, don't you? After all, the child has no opportunity to express an opposing view.
The right is always crying about keeping big government out of our lifes, and yet, every proposal by the right, threatens bigger and more intrusive government.

Can someone explain this to me?

Hoot
What's the beef? Congress debates and votes. Were you 'crying' like this during the forty years the Democrats were in control?
 
heyjoeo said:
I
have to keep repeating myself because people don't listen.

Personally, The world and I aren't ready to decide whether or not a fetus is a living HUMAN.
I wasn't aware that you were imbued with some special status that gave you the knowledge, wisdom, and even the right to make such a decision. Tell me, on what basis would you decide whether the occupant of a womb is a living human?

You were saying manslaughter and different kinds of murder, but if the act is KILLING the other and you are the KILLER you are comitting 1st degree murder (wheter you be the doctor or the serial killer, yet again taking into the consideration that a fetus is a human being).
If you know anyone in the legal profession, I respectfully suggest that you repeat the foregoing to him and ask for a response.

I like your solution there Contrarian. Make the people whining put up the cash for the baby to give it that chance at "living."
Are you aware that in an ever increasing number of states, a woman may drop off an unwanted newborn child at any firehouse, no questions asked? This is the preferred alternative to having the child end up in a dumpster.
 
Fantasea said:
I think the decision is a bit too personal for the child involved, don't you? After all, the child has no opportunity to express an opposing view.

Did I make a decision? I said the world and I AREN'T READY TO DECIDE whether or not a fetus is a living human.

I'd suggest instead of trying to not answer my argument about the legal matter that you tell me the opposing view on how you look at it.
 
Back
Top Bottom