Another Oklahoma Fail

JJHusker1 said:
I know sometimes it can be hard to keep up with the discussion but my point was not to promote immediate executions but rather to point out that what tschu was complaining about was really the way our legal system works and not anything to do directly with the DP. Surely there are better ways to administer our system than allowing endless appeals and decades on death row.
Click to expand...
If you're sure of a better way to come as close to certainty as possible then you should spell it out for us.

JJHusker1 said:
I guess some of you think our system is already as good as it ever could be.
Click to expand...
Far from it but it's the best that I have seen so far. I'll gladly listen to suggestions if you can provide any.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
JJ you're now operating under the assumption that we could ever be 100% sure of someone's guilt, and that all juries, judges, and lawyers could ever perform their jobs with 100% accuracy. This will never happen, so legal system inefficiencies are inherently part of the discussion. Again, not the main reason and nobody is basing their entire argument on it. It's just one more nail in the coffin (okay I didn't mean to write that phrase but I did so I'm just gonna roll with it) for the death penalty argument.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
tschu said:
carlfense said:
JJHusker1 said:
5- Once again that is an indictment of our legal system and not the death penalty. Kill them the next day, without appeal, and this becomes a moot point.
Click to expand...
Wow.

Not much else to say.

Bunch of good christian folks up in here.
default_hmmph.gif
Click to expand...
JJHusker1 said:
Some people get too hung up on thinking death is the absolute worst thing. I guess that is natural for people who have no belief in eternal life.

Now if we want to talk about questionable morals, let's visit about people who are opposed to the death penalty (for people who have proven through their own actions that they don't deserve to live) but have no problem with abortion of an innocent fetus who has harmed absolutely no one. Talk about mind blowing......
Click to expand...
The hypocrisy found in Christendom is what drove me far, far away. It's "pick and choose what you want to believe." At best. Love your neighbor as yourself, and Jesus forgives us all for our sins. Unless you're a convicted killer, then murder that bastard. No appeals. Kill him now. But alas, let's stick to the topic at hand shall we.
Click to expand...
It's sure a good thing YOU don't pick and choose what you want to believe yet you expect others to fall in line with some ill conceived notion of what you think Christianity is all about. You're making the mistake of relating earthly punishment for crimes with forgiveness and salvation from God. Two WAY different things there. I've got no problem with thinking some crimes deserve the death penalty and also believing that person may receive forgiveness from God. Oh, and when somebody raises an inconsistency you can't really defend, please feel free to continue calling those things strawmen and red herrings. It's come to be expected.

Too summarize your positions;

A) It is wrong to kill people convicted of heinous crimes. Because? It costs too much, it is cruel, an innocent person may be executed.

B) No problem killing unborn babies who have not harmed anyone.

Apparently raping, murdering, and dismembering other human beings is not as bad as possibly becoming a financial burden on an unwed mother.

Somehow your claims of hypocrisy found in Christendom are not making much of an impression on me.

Edit- Sorry, but I had already typed this response before reading the last few posts about not turning this into a Christian thing. But I'm leaving it because I think it needed to be said.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
JJHusker1 said:
Too summarize your positions;

A) It is wrong to kill people convicted of heinous crimes. Because? It costs too much, it is cruel, an innocent person may be executed.

B) No problem killing unborn babies who have not harmed anyone.
Click to expand...
So you think killing an innocent baby (fetus, actually, and generally not "alive") is horrendous . . . but killing an innocent adult is an acceptable risk.

Somehow that makes sense, I guess.

 
carlfense said:
JJHusker1 said:
Too summarize your positions;

A) It is wrong to kill people convicted of heinous crimes. Because? It costs too much, it is cruel, an innocent person may be executed.

B) No problem killing unborn babies who have not harmed anyone.
Click to expand...
So you think killing an innocent baby (fetus, actually, and generally not "alive") is horrendous . . . but killing an innocent adult is an acceptable risk.

Somehow that makes sense, I guess.
Click to expand...
How about this...let's not kill either one.

Deal?

 
Abortion and the Death Penalty are both totally separate issues (with a common concept at their roots, admittedly); I think discussing them both at once obfuscates the debates over both issues.

There is some truth to saying that someone who is morally against DP but supports abortion rights shows a little inconsistency, but at the same time, the "pro-life" folks who support the death penalty are equally inconsistent. Both sides own some hypocrisy, but then again, these are two different subjects.

But consider this, I don't think anyone who supports abortion rights is actually a proponent of more abortions or killing babies. However, a lot of people who support the death penalty, including discussion in this very thread, do advocate killing more people. If you support that and claim to be pro-life, I would suggest that is more hypocritical than the other side. The true pro-life position would be against the death penalty AND against abortion.

 
carlfense said:
If you think that part of the reason for the death penalty is because of overcrowding then other ways of reducing overcrowding has everything to do with this.
Click to expand...
Part of the benefit of the death penalty is reducing inmates, not part of the reason for it.

tschu said:
We killed a whole 39 people in 2013. Hardly helping the overcrowding issue.
Click to expand...
We should be executing a good deal more. If we were, that number would go up and it wouldn't be quite so insignificant.

 
EbylHusker said:
carlfense said:
If you think that part of the reason for the death penalty is because of overcrowding then other ways of reducing overcrowding has everything to do with this.
Click to expand...
Part of the benefit of the death penalty is reducing inmates, not part of the reason for it.
Click to expand...
Why do you think that is a significant difference? If the benefits aren't a reason for it . . . why bring them into the discussion?

 
Back
Top