The Death Penalty is wrong, as is abortion. The death penalty is state sponsored murder. Abortion is not as easy to compartamentalize. What constitutes life? From conception, when the fetus is viable outside mommy, etc etc etc? My "cough" religeous beliefs say its wrong. I am not a big fan of imposing my morality on anybody else, as I certainly do not want your views forced upon me. Some people do not think a fetus counts also.
yeah all for killing babies, maybe I'll go kill some babies today, then I'll go smoke a joint with fidel castro, and burn some bibles
Let's turn the question around and ask what constitutes death? Absence of a heartbeat. If the absence of a heartbeat is death, then the presence of a heartbeat is life. A baby's first heartbeat occurs at five weeks. I don't take issue with those who are against both the death penalty and abortion. I can respect that. It's a consistent view. What I don't understand, is keeping murderers, rapists and pedophiles alive at all costs, while there's no problem with killing innocent babies. There is no rationale.
There is no benefit in combining the rationale for abortion with the rational for capital punishment.
Just a note on the cost - after trials, appeals, and so forth, if I have my facts straight, the average death penalty case far exceeds the life-no parole case in court costs. I understand your feelings, and I share them. I just don't know if I have that right, unless it is executed (no pun intended) in the service of saving myself my loved ones, or anyone in harm's way.
If peeps are against abortion then should apply their beliefs to their own lives and let other people decide for themselves.
I just dont agree. My rationale for being pro-choice is has nothing to do with the high blown intellectual argument( which I realize we arent discussing or the shitty ruling on ROE v WADE) but more along the lines of the practical. Definitely not to satisfy the base desire of being able to fuck sans repurcussions. I think no one has the right to dictate to others on this issue what is permissable. I am Roman Catholic...I think its a mortal sin (straight to hell) but those are my beliefs. Nobody wants to live under another groups religeous doctrine. About keeping the "bad guys" alive...its not possible to equate the actions of the state and those of an individual. Its been too long since I read any of this, but where does our social contract with the state cover "the rights of the unborn"? Rousseau submission to the authority of the general will of the people as a whole guarantees individuals against being subordinated to the wills of others and also ensures that they obey themselves because they are, collectively, the authors of the law.
Except that there is that troublesome notion of The Founder that may lead, for example, to the Committee for Public Safety and Robespierre. And most Founders don't easily and voluntarily relinquish their "birthing authority."
Off with your head. The Frenchies should have read the Federalist Papers and their concerns re:tyranny of the majority.
That's a good point. It is an interesting dilemma, and Rousseau never dealt with it - the tension between individual liberty and accord with "the General Will," especially when "Le Peuple" require a Founder to show them back home to the state of nature, state of grace.
The impression you left is that you were against abortion. A pro-choice stance would contradict that. Religion isn't part of the equation I'm arguing, nor does one need religious beliefs to see that murdering babies is wrong. Murder is murder. Whether it's an innocent baby who is guilty of nothing less that selfish parents, or the sick twisted guy that preys on kids and murders them. Or the sick twisted guy who is put to death for doing such. I'm more concerned with the rights of the unborn, who we can be 100% sure have committed no crime, other than having irresponsible selfish parents, then the guy that murders a woman and her week old child. Life is life. A heartbeat begins at five weeks. I'm pretty sure the will of a baby is to live. After all, we are discussing it years later on a forum. Evidence we both had the will to live. Again, my point is, how does someone come to the rationale that we murder innocent babies, who have never had the chance to become something in life, but it's not ok to murder the rapist, child molesters and murderers who had a choice in life, but chose that path? It seems such a logical choice to me.
I guess I just like to rely on and trust our legal system. It is far from perfect, but it is about the best thing going. Celebrities seem to be exempt from accurate judgement however.