Why do the same people that argue against abortion support the death penalty, and vice versa?

[Dragnov]

Who are we, as a society, to judge innocence and guilt with a certainty that we can give or revoke life based on our judgement? Are we that infallible?

I hate this "You shouldn't judge other people" crap.

You judge people every single freakin day. You judge whether or not they are worthy of your friendship, you judge whether they have any decency in them, you judge whether or not they commited a crime, you judge their punishment, you judge if they are psychotic or not. WE JUDGE PEOPLE AND WE WILL ALWAYS JUDGE PEOPLE. No, we are not that infallible but thus is life.

So, the innocent deserve to live, and the guilty deserve to die

Uhh, yes. You don't believe in that?

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: Nitemare
My beliefs...
killers of other people have forfeited their rights to life since they took it from someone else

That does not necessarily justify the death penalty. Simply because someone does not have an explicit right to something does not mean that it should be taken from him. There is a concept called "mercy" which basically states that sometimes it's ok to give someone something, even though he's no longer deserving of it.

I don't have to justify the death penalty to feel ok about it. Mercy IS applied very often but sometimes a crime is so very brutal and so very terrible that mercy is not something you can consider. Mercy would be getting that person out of our society.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: notfred
This thread isn't about abortion (or the death penalty) it's about hipocrasy and the value of human life.

Sorry but not all those who are anti-abortion dislike abortion because of the reasons listed. I am anti-abortion because it is an innocent life. A murderer is NOT an innocent life. Do you see the difference?

Not really. You'll end up supporting ending the life of someone who was an unwanted pregnancy in the end.

That's kind of an interesting point.... I wonder what percentage of death row inmates (and exucuted prisoners) parents had actually planned to have children before getting pregnant. I bet it's fairly low.

What I find really hypocritical is that those who are determined to force these unwanted pregnancies to go full term usually wash their hands of any responsibility for these children once they are born.

Who are these hypocritical people you speak of?

Anyone who opposes Pro-Choice!

Bullsh!t. Who is making arguments based on generalization here Red? You. I oppose Pro-Choice. I guess I must be a cold hearted hypocritical bastard then eh?

 

[notfred]

Originally posted by: Gr1mL0cK

Who are we, as a society, to judge innocence and guilt with a certainty that we can give or revoke life based on our judgement? Are we that infallible?

I hate this "You shouldn't judge other people" crap.

You judge people every single freakin day. You judge whether or not they are worthy of your friendship, you judge whether they have any decency in them, you judge whether or not they commited a crime, you judge their punishment, you judge if they are psychotic or not. WE JUDGE PEOPLE AND WE WILL ALWAYS JUDGE PEOPLE. No, we are not that infallible but thus is life.

You're right, you do judge people every day. However, when you judge someone unworthy of your friendship, you don't kill them. You can always go back and reverse that judgement later if the persons becomes worthy of your friendship. Judging people is a given, killing them is not.

and as far as

So, the innocent deserve to live, and the guilty deserve to die

Uhh, yes. You don't believe in that?

I beleive the first half of it.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Nitemare
My beliefs..
unborn babies have yet to do any wrong and thus deserve life

killers of other people have forfeited their rights to life since they took it from someone else

Your only beliefs is forcing your beliefs on others!

and yours is attempting to prove your are a man by belittling others to make of for lack of scrotum-size... your point is?

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Millennium

Originally posted by: notfred
This thread isn't about abortion (or the death penalty) it's about hipocrasy and the value of human life.

Sorry but not all those who are anti-abortion dislike abortion because of the reasons listed. I am anti-abortion because it is an innocent life. A murderer is NOT an innocent life. Do you see the difference?

Not really. You'll end up supporting ending the life of someone who was an unwanted pregnancy in the end.

That's kind of an interesting point.... I wonder what percentage of death row inmates (and exucuted prisoners) parents had actually planned to have children before getting pregnant. I bet it's fairly low.

What I find really hypocritical is that those who are determined to force these unwanted pregnancies to go full term usually wash their hands of any responsibility for these children once they are born.

Who are these hypocritical people you speak of?

Anyone who opposes Pro-Choice!

Bullsh!t. Who is making arguments based on generalization here Red? You. I oppose Pro-Choice. I guess I must be a cold hearted hypocritical bastard then eh?

It's possible you aren't as there are exceptions to every rule. Just because I am Pro Choice doesn't mean that I am Pro Abortion. I would hope the choice is to keep the child but I am leaving that choice up to the mother, not the Motherfscking government!

 

[BDawg]

I don't believe that either one is right. I know I couldn't perform either one. However, my belief is led by my religion. I have no right to force this belief on others. I think both should remain legal. Besides, it's the woman's body, not mine, and I don't think that a fetus == a human baby.

 

[Dragnov]

You're right, you do judge people every day. However, when you judge someone unworthy of your friendship, you don't kill them. You can always go back and reverse that judgement later if the persons becomes worthy of your friendship. Judging people is a given, killing them is not.

When a person commits murder, personally I have no doubts that the person does not deserve to live.

I beleive the first half of it.

Isn't an unborn child, innocent? (Well I guess you can argue whether or not its really a child).

What do you suggest instead of the death penalty? Life in prison? Thats not very satisfying. But regardless, does it really matter? Life in prison or the death penalty? You already dictated how they would live the rest of their life (you can even argue life in prision is more harsh) and where they will die.

But back on topic. As stated earlier by others. Pro-life people aren't necessarily against the taking away of a human life. They are against taking away an INNOCENT human life. (and yes, we do determine who is innocent and who is guilty). I see nothing hypocritical in this.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: BDawg
I don't believe that either one is right. I know I couldn't perform either one. However, my belief is led by my religion. I have no right to force this belief on others. I think both should remain legal. Besides, it's the woman's body, not mine, and I don't think that a fetus == a human baby.

Imagine how free you could be if you could shed the chains of your religion?

 

[notfred]

Originally posted by: Gr1mL0cK

You're right, you do judge people every day. However, when you judge someone unworthy of your friendship, you don't kill them. You can always go back and reverse that judgement later if the persons becomes worthy of your friendship. Judging people is a given, killing them is not.

When a person commits murder, personally I have no doubts that the person does not deserve to live.

I beleive the first half of it.

Isn't an unborn child, innocent? (Well I guess you can argue whether or not its really a child).

Yes it is.

What do you suggest instead of the death penalty? Life in prison? Thats not very satisfying. But regardless, does it really matter? Life in prison or the death penalty? You already dictated how they would live the rest of their life (you can even argue life in prision is more harsh) and where they will die.

I know you're joking when you say life in prison isn't a very satisfying punishment. However, it brings up a good point: the purpose of the justice system is NOT revenge. Punishments should not be doles out based on the emotional response of the public to the crime committed. And on the subject of life imprisonment, I'm gonig to reference a movie. I know it's fictional, but it still supports what I'm saying. Did you see The Shawshank Redemption? Andy was sentanced to life in prison. While there, he greatly improved the library of the prison. He helped some people out. He helped a guy to get his diploma. He did good for a lot of people. I'm not saying something as dramtic is going to happen in real lief, but it is entirely possible that some people in prison will be positive influences on some of the other inmates. It is also entirely possible to wrongly convict someone.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: Nitemare
My beliefs...
killers of other people have forfeited their rights to life since they took it from someone else

That does not necessarily justify the death penalty. Simply because someone does not have an explicit right to something does not mean that it should be taken from him. There is a concept called "mercy" which basically states that sometimes it's ok to give someone something, even though he's no longer deserving of it.

There is where we differ, I view it as eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth
or do unto uthers as you would have done upon you.

I do not believe in mercy for those that rape, murder and torture innocents

What I do not see is how someonce can support abortion and be against capital punishment? To me that would be like saying its ok to kill something that has not sinned but is forbidden to kill someone that has commited barbaric crimes against humanity...not that I am trying to force my ideas down someone throat or anything, just voicing the way I feel.

 

[FeathersMcGraw]

Originally posted by: Nitemare

There is where we differ, I view it as eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth
or do unto uthers as you would have done upon you.

And that sort of philosophy seems to be working out just fine in the Middle East.

 

[notfred]

Originally posted by: Nitemare

or do unto uthers as you would have done upon you.

So, if you were to murder someone, you would request the death penalty?

 

[Dragnov]

I know you're joking when you say life in prison isn't a very satisfying punishment. However, it brings up a good point: the purpose of the justice system is NOT revenge. Punishments should not be doles out based on the emotional response of the public to the crime committed. And on the subject of life imprisonment, I'm gonig to reference a movie. I know it's fictional, but it still supports what I'm saying. Did you see The Shawshank Redemption? Andy was sentanced to life in prison. While there, he greatly improved the library of the prison. He helped some people out. He helped a guy to get his diploma. He did good for a lot of people. I'm not saying something as dramtic is going to happen in real lief, but it is entirely possible that some people in prison will be positive influences on some of the other inmates. It is also entirely possible to wrongly convict someone.

Although thats possible, I'm pretty sure that it's extremely rare. A person that was willing to commit murder (I don't think a single murder even gets the death penalty unless its a highly publicized or dealing w/ government), isn't very likely to go to the opposite extreme. I'm pretty sure they are probably more often of a security threat than a helping hand. The person may be a positive influence on his other inmates, but nothing can replace the damage that person did upon the family/relatives/friends. Personally, I do not believe whatever good he does to others can ever justify the taking of a life.

It is possible to wrongly convict someone (as in Andy's case) but seriously what can we do about that? All because there are flaws, you cannot tear down the system and allow serial killers and such to have the liberty to experience something they purposely want to take from others. The judical system is detterence/punishment... not reformation. I do believe the death penalty is the only deserving punishment people of these types can get.

 

[notfred]

Originally posted by: Gr1mL0cK
you cannot ... allow serial killers and such to have the liberty to experience something they purposely want to take from others.

Sure you can. It doesn't hurt you at all for a serial killer to be living in a prison. I'd much rather have a few serial killers living in a prison somewhere, and have a few innocent men get a wrongful conviction overturned than to just kill the whole lot of them.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: Gr1mL0cK
you cannot ... allow serial killers and such to have the liberty to experience something they purposely want to take from others.

Sure you can. It doesn't hurt you at all for a serial killer to be living in a prison. I'd much rather have a few serial killers living in a prison somewhere, and have a few innocent men get a wrongful conviction overturned than to just kill the whole lot of them.

Or the sentencing can get screwed up ala the Texas Serial Killer that is due to be released in 2006. If they would have killed the bastard to begin with, there never would have been anyone worrying about his release. What say you to that?

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: FeathersMcGraw

Originally posted by: Nitemare

There is where we differ, I view it as eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth
or do unto uthers as you would have done upon you.

And that sort of philosophy seems to be working out just fine in the Middle East.

Yup, crime is alot lower there.

Only problem with them is this philosophy only counts if you kill other Muslims...kill all the whiteys you want. We are after all, de debil.

Look at the crime statistics in these eye for an eye countries and compare it to the good US of A....

If I killed someone of course I would attempt to preserve my life as is human nature...but then again I don't think I could look into the eyes of the widower, his/her children and parents and ask for their pity either.

 

[Dragnov]

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: Gr1mL0cK
you cannot ... allow serial killers and such to have the liberty to experience something they purposely want to take from others.

Sure you can. It doesn't hurt you at all for a serial killer to be living in a prison. I'd much rather have a few serial killers living in a prison somewhere, and have a few innocent men get a wrongful conviction overturned than to just kill the whole lot of them.

A serial killer poses a threat to the guards, workers, other inmantes. They'll make others lives complete hell (guards, inmates, workers, etc.) or possibly kill more than the government does of the wrongly convicted.

The possiblity of being wrongfully convicted is out there yes. But there are appeals and the LONG time for anything to happen. We cannot dumb down the sentences of those convicted for whatever crime they have commited because there is the slim to none chance a person is wrongly convicted. Its simply, does the punishment fit the crime? And a serial killer does deserve the death penalty as punishment IMO.

This is off the original topic of course, but you started it.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: notfred

Originally posted by: Gr1mL0cK
you cannot ... allow serial killers and such to have the liberty to experience something they purposely want to take from others.

Sure you can. It doesn't hurt you at all for a serial killer to be living in a prison. I'd much rather have a few serial killers living in a prison somewhere, and have a few innocent men get a wrongful conviction overturned than to just kill the whole lot of them.

I'd rather go ahead and kill them so that the family of the victim would have peace of mind and so no bleeding heart judge can release them down the road after they feel that they are no longer a menace to society and have properly attoned of their wrongs.

 

[FeathersMcGraw]

Originally posted by: Nitemare

And that sort of philosophy seems to be working out just fine in the Middle East.

Look at the crime statistics in these eye for an eye countries and compare it to the good US of A....

And now compare the lifestyles between the two.

My point is that rampant vigilantism doesn't make for a better society. You can also reduce crime by instituting a totalitarian or fascistic regime, too.

 

[jyates]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: BDawg
I don't believe that either one is right. I know I couldn't perform either one. However, my belief is led by my religion. I have no right to force this belief on others. I think both should remain legal. Besides, it's the woman's body, not mine, and I don't think that a fetus == a human baby.

Imagine how free you could be if you could shed the chains of your religion?

And some would say those without "religion" are the ones in chains also sir.
As in most things, time will tell.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: BDawg
I don't believe that either one is right. I know I couldn't perform either one. However, my belief is led by my religion. I have no right to force this belief on others. I think both should remain legal. Besides, it's the woman's body, not mine, and I don't think that a fetus == a human baby.

Imagine how free you could be if you could shed the chains of your religion?

For some reason, that struck me as particularly piquant.