High Court Ends Juvenile Death Penalty

[LizDevil30]

The bottom line is, people only care about protecting the rights that they want to protect. Logic doesn't matter. Arguing is futile. The world is full of contradictions and hypocrisy. I mean you could go down a list of "if you can do this, than why not that?" "Or if you can't do this than why can't you do that?"

No analogy works, when a person has their mind made up, there's nothing that is going to change it.

My favorite childhood story is Horton Hears a Who. Today in my kids school they were having Dr. Seuss day. Anyway I just love that story. "A person's a person, no matter how small." All life, evil or thumb size, IN MY HUMBLE OPINION, is not for anyone to take away.

[sheeps]

The bottom line is, people only care about protecting the rights that they want to protect. Logic doesn't matter.  Arguing is futile.  The world is full of contradictions and hypocrisy.  I mean you could go down a list of "if you can do this, than why not that?" "Or if you can't do this than why can't you do that?"

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's exactly what I mean. Sure it's weird that most Democrats are pro-choice and anti-death penalty while most Republicans are pro-life and pro-death penalty, but all that says is that both sides separate the issues from each other. So really, no analogy SHOULD work.

No analogy works, when a person has their mind made up, there's nothing that is going to change it. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I dunno... I'm all for arguing the issue at hand. I know analogies work but with the abortion - death penalty - eating meat - war etc etc arguments... people always boil it down to, "x is a life, therefore we must protect it." "But y is a life as well, why aren't you protecting it?" "Errr... shut up."

But I do believe people can change their minds. I went from solidly pro-life to solidly pro-choice to where I am now - pro-choice but with increased restrictions. I would not be opposed to three months becoming the limit for abortions (except for cases that jeopardize a woman's health). You get a month and some to find out your pregnant and almost two months to decide. More than fair. I also believe that abortion shouldn't be celebrated. That's how Ralph Nader words it. He's strongly pro-choice but even more so is for a decreased amount of abortions. I think condoms should be just about free and that the norm for sex should not be determined by TV culture but by responsible education. (Incidentally, while in Canada, I noticed condoms were roughly 1/2 the price as here. I don't know if they're subsidized by the government somehow, but I was very happy to see that. Less expensive condoms = more safe sex = less STD's and abortions. Yay!) All I see abstinence-only sex ed doing is not informing teens about protection, thus they rely on what they see on TV or hear about from friends. Based on some of the stories I've heard on TV and from friends, yeah, I'm pushing for comprehensive sex ed!

[LizDevil30]

I totally agree you can't have enough birth control and sex ed. I think condoms should be avail in vending machines where teens hang out. That is what really irks me about anti-abortionists, they tend to be anti- sex ed and birth control to teens. How stupid can you be? I also support the morning after pill.

Now I have to dig out "Horton" and read it to my six year old. I think I have the tape too. "Boil that dust speck. Boil that dust speck."

[TK]

If murderers should be put to death, do we fry the guy who flips the switch?

Edited March 3, 2005 by TK421

[sheeps]

WHOAH    Talk about massive over-simplification!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I was responding to your post and asking you to explain further. It was a question, not a statement.

Did I ever once say I was in favor of abolishing the death penalty? No. And yet I'm labelled as a liberal who wants to "get rid of it entirely so you get rid of the problem." Nice spin. My original post said, "You want 0% chance of someone getting out? Give him/her life in prison, no parole, no exceptions. If they somehow escape, THEN give them the death penalty for trying to escape. I am not against the death penalty in theory but I truly believe life in jail is a worse punishment."

All I've been saying all along is that I believe life in jail is a worse punishment. Never have I once said I am anti-death penalty. I would honestly rather have someone stay in jail for the rest of their lives than getting fried to death. That is all.

So I have to go back to my argument, again, because nobody seems to pay attention. What are the problems with life in prison? Parole - so give no parole, no exceptions (three times saying that now). Escape - make prisons that people can't escape from (two times saying that now). And if you don't think the United States can cook up an escape-proof prison, well, that's not having much faith in the United States.

As for abortion, I never said you brought it up TK, did I? I mean, how many things do you want to accuse me of? Anyways... I could have sworn a year ago you said you were pro-choice up until a certain time... did this change or were you always pro-life?

All I can say about abortion is that everybody draws the line somewhere. Liz says morning after pills are OK. You say abortions are OK only if in the cases of rape or medical emergency. Some people say all abortions, including morning after pills and even in cases of rape, should be illegal. Some people say partial-birth abortions are A-OK. Everybody draws the line somewhere yet once again we feel a need to be polar opposites. I don't buy it.

We draw the line somewhere with everything. You value a human fetus more so than the steak you eat? Great. That's where you draw the lines. The tough part comes in when everybody in this country draws the line at certain points. Anti-war, pro-war; pro-life, pro-choice; pro-death penalty, anti-death penalty; do we have to polarize each other like this? As E-Devil said, he falls into the liberal category but he has had the most convincing arguments for the death penalty in this thread.

It's not all black and white, especially with abortion, and I believe people need to recognize that. Personally, I believe the line should be at three months with anything over that needing to be from medical emergency. Your logic that everybody starts out at a small size is flawed; everybody starts out as half-sperm half-egg, and with the millions upon millions of sperm meeting with a different egg every month, there are literally billions of chances of outcomes. One of them is what you end up being. So even though we're only taking into account two parents, you had less than one in a 1,000,000,000 chance of being who you ended up being. And don't give me the, "Well, it starts from the fertilized egg then" argument. Over 3/4 of fertilized eggs are flushed out during a woman's menstual cycle, so really, nature performs many times more "abortions" than we humans do.

I personally value human life more than potential human life and find it rather ironic that many pro-life'rs couldn't give two sh!ts about the homeless guy at the end of the street. Sure they set up No Abort agencies that provide maternity needs, but once the baby is there and the crib is set up, they don't give a sh!t. Personally I'd rather focus on the problems of the people that are already born. I'd love for all the people who protest abortion to start working on stuff we face as adults - poverty, homelessness, hunger, disease. But I guess I'm stupid for thinking that because a fetus is more important than the homeless guy at the end of my street

[Don]

I feel bad for the Conservatives on this board since they are outnumbered 12 to 1. The death penalty is an issue I've have long agreed with Conservatives with so I figured I would give them a lot of help this time, maybe I jumped the gun.

Woah!! Someone has trouble counting. Leeds, TK, 731, GoDevils... there's a fair number of Conservatives here. Just not today, other than yourself and TK. And I'm willing to bet that the number of posts in the forum is dominated by Conservatives, if not the actual number of posters.

[LizDevil30]

Oops that would be me of bringing up abortion in this thread. I guess because it's an analogy I've often made (death penalty/abortion) of course to no avail.

I noticed in this discussion nothing is black/white. I don't think there are truly one sided folks on this board. Everyone's life is shades of gray. That is what I find interesting. People tend to box people in because of one ideology. I consider myself very "liberal" (a subjective term if ever there was one) even my anti-abortion stance I consider liberal, in that it extends human rights to the unborn, not just the "out of womb" humans. I digress. Anyway my point is, that I was discussing abortion with my sister and because of my stance she immediately assumed I was a pro-death penalty person. They go hand in hand right? She was ready to lay into me until I told her that I didn't believe in the death penalty-- at all. She didn't know how to respond.

[Jimmy Leeds]

The Supreme Court ruling is ridiculous. When was the last time we put a JUVENILE to death?

100 years ago?

It takes 15 years for the appeal process alone.

[SueNJ97]

It would be a mistake to try and generalize about the abortion/death penalty bucketing by liberal and conservative. While I do know many people who fit into the 'traditional' buckets, I also know many people across the political spectrum who support both (within limitations) and many people who support neither. It really is very personal.

As for making sure people can't escape, that's what supermax prisons are for. I believe the one in Colorado is an excellent example. However, we'd have to commit the funds to building lots more of them, given the state of our criminal justice system. I will say this, though. Although I do support the death penalty for certain crimes, if they decided to abolish it accross the board, the cost of actually dealing with the endless appeals of the sentences would disappear. Despite the arguments, it costs more to execute someone than it does to keep them in prison, because of the actual judicial process they are entitled to, which can take as long as 15-20 years of legal appeals. I'm not saying this isn't correct. I'm simply saying it destroys any argument about it being cheaper to execute someone, because the legal appeals process is so costly for the government.

Liz, I thought your article about Malvo being willing to talk once the death penalty was off the table was very interesting. It doesn't always work that way, though. Bundy was only willing to finally talk when execution was staring him in the face. About 30 families who never would have found out for sure what happened to their children were able to have some peace because Bundy hoped it might buy him a few more days if he talked. The authorities were able to find some of the bodies they had been unable to locate and the families were able to bury their daughters. He even confessed to a few killings in Northern California that they didn't know he was involved in. Back to the Malvo case... if I were a juror I wouldn't have given Malvo the death penalty anyway. I always felt he was unduly influenced by the adult involved in the case.

[RowdyFan42]

Yes, innocent people have been put to death, it's horrible, so should we just end the death penalty? I do not think so. I always said fix the system, not the punishment. Whether it's death penatly, life, simple jail time, fine.. we MUST be confident that our system is working and provide every means for double checking to ensure only the guilty pay. I feel with todays advances in investigation, it's pretty hard to get the wrong guy unless you are extremely unlucky, but there are always exceptions. Fix the system, make the death penalty very hard to administer, but do not abolish it...

Would it be fair, then, to stop executions until the system is fixed?

[TK]

So I have to go back to my argument, again, because nobody seems to pay attention.  What are the problems with life in prison?  Parole - so give no parole, no exceptions (three times saying that now).  Escape - make prisons that people can't escape from (two times saying that now).  And if you don't think the United States can cook up an escape-proof prison, well, that's not having much faith in the United States.

There's no such thing as a full proof, throw away the key, escape proof prision. If there is a way in, there's always a way out. If you think otherwise, then you don't have much faith in human ingenuity...

As for abortion, I never said you brought it up TK, did I?  I mean, how many things do you want to accuse me of? 

Well your post sounded like you were lecturing ME about the poor analogy when it wasn't even I who brought it up

  Your logic that everybody starts out at a small size is flawed;

How is that flawed? You've heard of a person that skipped the "Size of a thumb" stage?

  Over 3/4 of fertilized eggs are flushed out during a woman's menstual cycle, so really, nature performs many times more "abortions" than we humans do.

I really don't like that reasoning. That means billions of abortions are carried out when a man masterbates? Come on, let's have a serious dicussion.

You started talking about a fetus the size of your thumb, at that stage it's pretty clear what this thing is developing into, and that's what I'm basing the arguement on. If nature intends that 3/4 of fertilized eggs are flushed, well, that's nature. That shouldn't give the green light to chopping up something that wasn't flushed out and that IS developing into a human being.

 

I personally value human life more than potential human life and find it rather ironic that many pro-life'rs couldn't give two sh!ts about the homeless guy at the end of the street.  Sure they set up No Abort agencies that provide maternity needs, but once the baby is there and the crib is set up, they don't give a sh!t.  Personally I'd rather focus on the problems of the people that are already born.  I'd love for all the people who protest abortion to start working on stuff we face as adults - poverty, homelessness, hunger, disease.  But I guess I'm stupid for thinking that because a fetus is more important than the homeless guy at the end of my street 

I'm sure you'll find many pro-choicers that don't give a sh!t about the homeless guy at the end of the street too, does that statement apply to them too?

Nice Spin... you say it's dumb to make a death penalty-abortion analogy but it's OK to make a homelessness-abortion analogy

[TK]

Would it be fair, then, to stop executions until the system is fixed?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If there was a great chance that a substantial improvment could be made to the system, then sure, I would be for it. But only suspending executions, not letting death rowers off the hook. Sure, some death row inmates would not face execution as they would probably die of old age by the time any change takes effect, but it would be more then worth it to fix the system for the long term.

[LizDevil30]

I have to agree with TK here. (there's a first time for everything )Most homeless shelters are run by churches. As a matter of fact the shelters in Bergen county actually close on weekends and evenings. Leaving the churches to pick up the slack. The Salvation Army also does a huge amount for the dispossessed. There are the Catholic Charties and Adoption Services that provide adoptions at a minimal cost for those that can't buy a baby. Unfortunately their waiting lists are very long. It is fair to say that religious organizations do far more for the needy than secular organizations. Again I believe analogies just don't work because someone will always analogize another way. You just can't lump people together, there is truly good and bad in all.

Edited March 4, 2005 by LizDevil30

[SueNJ97]

Would it be fair, then, to stop executions until the system is fixed?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If there was a great chance that a substantial improvment could be made to the system, then sure, I would be for it. But only suspending executions, not letting death rowers off the hook. Sure, some death row inmates would not face execution as they would probably die of old age by the time any change takes effect, but it would be more then worth it to fix the system for the long term.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I also have no objection to suspending (but not abolishing) the use of the death penalty while they resolve some of the issues that are out there. For example, if there are cases that can be opened up via the use of DNA evidence to make sure they have the right person, then they should damn well do it. I don't really care if the system says they shouldn't do it because it is against procedure. I want the right person off the streets. And it says something to me if the inmate is the one screaming for the DNA testing and the state is the one that DOESN'T want it to be done. Generally, guilty people don't want their blood drawn, unless they are so sociopathic they actually think they can beat the test.

Liz, I agree that the you can't generalize about who cares and how about the homeless. But I think that what is happening with regard to the homeless is that people are misunderstanding one another, big time...to the detriment of the homeless people involved. It is my opinion, and just my opinion, that many in the liberal community think that it can all be solved through the government, and dismiss the efforts of the religious organizations that you are talking about. But I also think that in many cases the conservatives dismiss the role the government has to play and would like to rely solely on the private organizations, which isn't really possible. Because many on both sides have a kind of disdain for the role the other plays, we wind up with this fingerpointing of "neither side gives a damn about the homeless". All I know is it's getting sad again in NYC. Every time I go on the subways there are people begging. And I have a personal rule not to give people money. I will buy them food, I will even pay for a hotel room for a night, but I WON'T give them money.

[LizDevil30]

Absolutely Sue, we need less finger pointing and more doing. Stop arguing about how something needs to get done and just do it. A little of this and some of that usually does the trick. I don't understand why, the league and union can't get a deal done! Oh wait, wrong forum. It is funny though isn't it, that compassion, compromise and respect run through all the threads of our life?

[sheeps]

Nice Spin... you say it's dumb to make a death penalty-abortion analogy but it's OK to make a homelessness-abortion analogy 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I went too far with that analogy - my point is, why do all these pro-lifers protest outside abortion clinics, at college campuses, high schools, etc, when they can do much more productive things with their time? Why don't they help feed the homeless? Are the homeless less important than the potential to abort a potential life?

And no, I'm not saying jacking off is killing millions of lives, I'm saying there are billions of different outcomes when you combine a man's sperm and a woman's egg. I don't get the, "Well, what if you weren't born?" analogy. What if I wasn't? Statistically I had a 1 in a billion plus chance of being me, so the odds were against me being born. Knowing the outcome doesn't mean the outcome was always guaranteed.

My point with the less than the size of a thumb argument is everybody draws the line somewhere. Are you against the morning after pill? What if it's just a cluster of cells, no more than 100 microscopic cells - is killing 100 cells OK? The problem is it's very hard to determine if you're pregnant until your first missed period, so most abortions either happen right away (morning after unsafe sex) or after at least a month. But what about the people that had safe sex, thus didn't use the morning after pill, but something went wrong? (No such thing as 100% safe sex.) Are they not allowed to get an abortion because they found out they were pregnant a month later, but the people who can get an abortion use the morning after pill? What are we doing here - rewarding unsafe sex?

[TK]

  Statistically I had a 1 in a billion plus chance of being me, so the odds were against me being born. 

What do you mean by that? I still don't understand...

1 in a billion chance a woman will get pregnant? So I have to have sex 1 billion times and hopefully one of those times a pregancy results? Sure, if you single out 1 sperm against all of them, then yes it's 1 in a billion chance you'll get a particular sperm. I didn't know this arguement was about which sperm you were going to get.

[sheeps]

No I'm saying men recycle billions of sperm in their life time and women flush a new egg every month or so, so between one man and one woman, and they only have one kid, it's like a one in like a 100 billion chance of ending up being you... you know who you are now, that doesn't mean your outcome was always determind. If your parents had sex one week later you'd have a 0% chance of being who you are today. So I don't get the "What if you were aboted?" argument. Well, there was a one in a 100 billion chance of me being born anyway. Besides, yeah I'm glad I was born, but how would I know if I were aborted? I wouldn't. I don't remember anything past around two years of age. If you're religious I can see being pro-life because you value those lives just as much as adult lives. But if you're not religious, I don't see how a six-yearMONTH! old fetus is more important than an adult human life.

Edited March 8, 2005 by sheeps

[Don]

I'm going on record saying that I don't think they should be aborting six year old fetuses. No matter how noisy they are.

[TK]

But if you're not religious, I don't see how a six-year old fetus is more important than an adult human life.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Correction - "an adult human life that murdered another adult human life"

If you recall...

Do I care more about a fetus the size of your thumb more then I care about a convicted murderer? Yes, of course.

Do I care more about a fetus the size of your thumb more then I care about an innocent man wrongfully sitting on death row? I have to say no. That doesn't mean we should abolish the death penalty.

[sheeps]

I'm going on record saying that I don't think they should be aborting six year old fetuses. No matter how noisy they are.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh god did I have a senior's moment at the age of 22?

Yes. Yes I did.