• 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
Your right to choose comes BEFORE you get pregnant. Choose to be responsible, or choose to get pregnant. You shouldn't have the right undo a mistake by undoing a child.

When the sperm reaches the egg, your ass is an apartment complex.
 
Gandhi>Bush said:
Your right to choose comes BEFORE you get pregnant. Choose to be responsible, or choose to get pregnant. You shouldn't have the right undo a mistake by undoing a child.

When the sperm reaches the egg, your ass is an apartment complex.
Click to expand...

That's your belief. NOT A CONFIRMED FACT.
My belief is different.
I respect yours and don't seek laws which force my belief into your personal life. Please have the same respect for me.
 
Roe v. Wade makes it okay to prevent a child's existence. This is CONFIRMED.

I respect your beliefs I truly do, but think: Scott peterson was tried for 2 murders. Including his UNBORN child, or fetus, or whatever you would like to call it. I'm not intrested in trying to force my beliefs on to you. I'm interested in protecting the right to live.
 
Gandhi>Bush said:
Roe v. Wade makes it okay to prevent a child's existence. This is CONFIRMED.

I respect your beliefs I truly do, but think: Scott peterson was tried for 2 murders. Including his UNBORN child, or fetus, or whatever you would like to call it. I'm not intrested in trying to force my beliefs on to you. I'm interested in protecting the right to live.
Click to expand...


You're referring to cases I know nothing about, presumably because they're United Statesian? I don't live there, I live in a civilised country, where fortunately, minority views like yours are not foisted on the majority with prohibitive laws.
I'm also interested in protecting the right to live. I do the job I do because I believe it's right to alleviate suffering and preserve life. But like many, I don't believe life begins at conception, and I believe everybody's life would be enhanced if you people with objections made your protests at the ballot box - not by pubicly demonising women in difficult situations who've already had to make an extremely difficult choice. And if your objection is religiously motivated, please, keep that crap in your church.
 
Urethra Franklin said:
You're referring to cases I know nothing about, presumably because they're United Statesian? I don't live there, I live in a civilised country, where fortunately, minority views like yours are not foisted on the majority with prohibitive laws.
I'm also interested in protecting the right to live. I do the job I do because I believe it's right to alleviate suffering and preserve life. But like many, I don't believe life begins at conception, and I believe everybody's life would be enhanced if you people with objections made your protests at the ballot box - not by pubicly demonising women in difficult situations who've already had to make an extremely difficult choice. And if your objection is religiously motivated, please, keep that crap in your church.
Click to expand...
To the contrary, if in fact abortion is the minority view, it is only barely the minority veiw. The reality of the situation is that only the supreme court judges have the ability to decide whether it is legal or not, regardless of what the majority of Americans believe.
You are willing to protect the right to live, as so long as a woman is not inconvenienced. The side for legal abortions is one that is very bent on preserving rights over life. But the reality is that our rights are meant to preserve life themselves. It is a very selfish argument. On the other hand, it does nothing for us "rich white men" to have abortion illegal. What do we get out of it? A lot more children with mouths to feed... doesn't sound like a positive argument for that case. Do you really think we are so bent to hurt women that we force them to have children? We are not plotting against the right's of women, that is simply not what is in question. We are trying to preserve the rights for everyone. We do believe in the right for a woman to choose whether she has sex or not. But why then should she also have a choice beyond that? Once she has had sex she subjects herself to the consequence: pregnancy. Why then is it fair to give a woman multiple chances to get herself out of facing her own consequences but the child has absolutely no chance to speak for its life? I do not suggest that a woman be made to have and keep a child, but to at least allow it to live and then give it to a family that wants it. That, I feel is a perfectly centered argument. The woman does not have to deal with the "truama" of having to raise a child, and the baby can also have the chance to live. Where is the negative?
 
Urethra Franklin said:
You're referring to cases I know nothing about, presumably because they're United Statesian? I don't live there, I live in a civilised country, where fortunately, minority views like yours are not foisted on the majority with prohibitive laws.
I'm also interested in protecting the right to live. I do the job I do because I believe it's right to alleviate suffering and preserve life. But like many, I don't believe life begins at conception, and I believe everybody's life would be enhanced if you people with objections made your protests at the ballot box - not by pubicly demonising women in difficult situations who've already had to make an extremely difficult choice. And if your objection is religiously motivated, please, keep that crap in your church.
Click to expand...

It was not my intention to demonize anyone. And if we ever had the chance to vote on the issue, you better be damned sure I'd be there.

My views are not religously motivated. I'm using my brain, not my imaginary friend's, 100% on this one. It seems to me you have a problem with people demonizing women but absolutley no problem with people demonizing religous folk. I'm not even christian and I find that odd.

Just out of curiosity:

When does life begin? First breath? Heartbeat? When?

What "civilized country" are you a proud member of?
 
Ohh HELL no.

Civilized coutry = France? WTF madame?
 
Arch Enemy said:
She's a Frenchy.
Click to expand...

No, she isn't. She has chosen to live in France. And I don't blame her. Amazing country.
 
Ugh

Nationality is not important here. I apologize. Let's get back to topic.
 
Gandhi>Bush said:
In the real world do you not have a choice to use birth control?

Let's go to the abortion forum with this. This is a thread about the Death Penalty.
Click to expand...

Do you not have the choice to pull the trigger or rape that person or molest that child. Did you have a choice to take away their right to life. So we have the right to do the same with a clean consquience. Protect the rights to those who did not choose to die.
 
satinloveslibs said:
Do you not have the choice to pull the trigger or rape that person or molest that child. Did you have a choice to take away their right to life. So we have the right to do the same with a clean consquience. Protect the rights to those who did not choose to die.
Click to expand...
Yes, but do you not believe in demons satinloveslibs? Do you not believe that all of us are at some point or another prone to do something that we later regret utterly? A violent rage of a vengeful father, or a an uncontrolled jealosy of a woman whose husband was sleeping around... The majority of murders I would imagine are not simply cold and void of emotion. Do you think that one decision in life ought to warrant your death? I do not.
 
Somebody who is convicted should be able to choose between death penalty or life sentence. I can imagine that some people would prefer the first.
 
Personally, I don't care about their preferences. The fact is that I don't think we should be okay with government funded killing. especially in the case of our own citizens, regardless of crime.

it's too early for good grammar.
 
echnaton said:
Somebody who is convicted should be able to choose between death penalty or life sentence. I can imagine that some people would prefer the first.
Click to expand...

Welcome to Debate Politics!



Interesting take on the topic. Can’t see either side agreeing to this option. Seems pro people want them dead. Anti people don’t want to be killing people with tax payer money.
 
Pacridge said:
Welcome to Debate Politics!



Interesting take on the topic. Can’t see either side agreeing to this option. Seems pro people want them dead. Anti people don’t want to be killing people with tax payer money.
Click to expand...
Well, realistically don't they always have the option of commiting their own suicide? Would that not be the exact same thing as asking to die?
 
We don't exactly allow them to kill themselves you know.

In addition, suicide is a sin. :eek:
 
Gandhi>Bush said:
We don't exactly allow them to kill themselves you know.

In addition, suicide is a sin. :eek:
Click to expand...
Well, all things considered, if they had been overly concerned with sin, they probably wouldn't be in a trial that might warrant them the death penalty. And how do you really stop somebody from commiting suicide? If someone wants to die, there is not way of stopping them, they will find a way.
 
What ever happened to crimes of passion? What ever happened to repent and forgiveness?

We have mandatory suicide watch rules after you've been put on suicide watch you have to learn how to eat your entire dinner with a plastic spoon.
 
Gandhi>Bush said:
What ever happened to crimes of passion? What ever happened to repent and forgiveness?

We have mandatory suicide watch rules after you've been put on suicide watch you have to learn how to eat your entire dinner with a plastic spoon.
Click to expand...
I do believe that you can repent and ask forgiveness. But the majority of people who commit such crimes do not do so, especially not within the trial period. But, you're right, suicide is an act against the will of God. But could you not also say that telling someone else to kill you is not the exact same thing as suicide? It is willing yourself to die, whether it be by your own hand or by someone elses.

Ha, I have personally been on suicide watch. It is ridiculous, and for those who honestly want to die, it does not prevent them.
 
Nice company!
from:
http://www.amnestyusa.org/abolish/index.do
"Around 124 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice. On average, in the past decade more than three countries a year have abolished the death penalty for all crimes. Despite international human rights standards, some nations still execute people. Around the world, the death penalty is used as a tool of political repression and a means to forever silence political opponents or eliminate politically "troublesome" individuals. Learn more »
- China, Iran, the United States, and Viet Nam account for 97% of the executions recorded by Amnesty International in 2004."

Why should anyone be surprised that the "land of the free" also incarcerates a greater percentage of its population than any nation on earth.

The same nation that Human Rights Watch and Amnesty international say is covering up a national policy of torturing detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan by scapegoating subordinates.

This is all indicative of a gutter population that shows no interest in those things that the government does in its name.

But Americans know that Saddam Hussein was a beast. Each American should take a good look in the mirror.
 
myshkin said:
Why should anyone be surprised that the "land of the free" also incarcerates a greater percentage of its population than any nation on earth.
Click to expand...
Not to put too fine a point on it, I recall reading somewhere that the efficiency and effectiveness of the law enforcement and judicial systems in the US is the reason that the prison population is what it is.

Of course, if there were more law abiding folks, there would be fewer in the pokey, wouldn't there?

"I don't like that law.", does not justify disobeying it.
 
To concur with the point Fantasea made, if in two countries of similar size, one country arrested 80% of all criminals, while the other arrested 10%, does that mean the first country is 8 times worse than the second?

No.
 
Fantasea said:
Not to put too fine a point on it, I recall reading somewhere that the efficiency and effectiveness of the law enforcement and judicial systems in the US is the reason that the prison population is what it is.

Of course, if there were more law abiding folks, there would be fewer in the pokey, wouldn't there?

"I don't like that law.", does not justify disobeying it.
Click to expand...

Does this mean that we exceed even China and Iran?
 
Also, you must realize, countries with fewer laws inevitably have fewer crimes. If we made murder legal, our crime rate would plumit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom