Individuals who have committed crimes that are viewed as extremely heinous such as murder, drug trafficking and high treason are usually punished by either capital punishment or life imprisonment. Since the mid 20th century, there has been considerable debate as to which punishment is more appropriate. I believe that capital punishment is the far better option and the following justifies my claim.

Capital punishment is said to have a strong deterrent effect as the fear of death will stop a sizeable amount of potential criminals from committing crimes. For example, when a policeman holds a criminal at gunpoint and tells him to surrender, the criminal will usually comply. Besides that, consider the rape cases in South Africa. Most rapists are more likely to attack children instead of grown women because they fear the lethal consequences of AIDS which the women are more likely to have. This demonstrates that violent criminals are not immune to fear and would respond should capital punishment be more strongly enforced.

My next point is that concerning crimes criminals commit within prison when they kill prison guards and other inmates, and also when they kill innocent citizens upon escape, like Dawud Mu'Min who was serving a 48-year sentence for murder, when he escaped a road work gang and stabbed to death a storekeeper. They finally put him to death in 1994. It clearly shows that incarceration in prison does not put an end to crimes but may be the catalyst for further crimes as an inmate is surrounded with convicted criminals and is trapped in that felonious mindset.

Another flaw is that life imprisonment tends to deteriorate with the passing of time. In 1962, James Moore raped and strangled Pamela Moss. Her parents spared Moore the death penalty on condition that he is sentenced to life imprisonment. Later on due to a change in sentencing laws, James Moore is eligible for parole every two years! Moore should have been executed long ago and Pamela’s parents could have put the whole horrible incident behind them forever. Instead they have a nightmare to deal with biannually.

Next, Capital punishment is often defended on the grounds that society has a moral obligation to protect the safety and welfare of its citizens. Murderers threaten this safety and welfare. Only by putting murderers to death can society ensure zero recidivism. Serial killers such as Ted Bundy and Thug Berham reinforce the point that once a person has crossed that threshold of morality and murders another individual; he or she will be more likely to kill again than a normal individual.

Justice for All estimates that life imprisonment cases will cost $1.2 million - $3.6 million more than equivalent death penalty cases Capital punishment costs reside mainly in appeals costs. Life without parole prisoners get the same appeals and should be considered to bear the same costs, hence the clichéd arguments put forth by abolitionists that assume life imprisonment prisoners don’t have to bear appeal costs is made null and void. Essentially, taxpayers should not have to pay for the three square meals that a convicted criminal gets for the rest of his life.
As a conclusion, I would like to bring to mind that capital punishment is not about revenge, but stands for swift justice and fitting punishment and is appropriate.

oh my salem is the capital. big fucking whoopdidoo. portland the major city. there, miss ocd happy?

Well, regardless of what either of us think there are always going to be people on both sides.

the way i see it is that it's better to have one die than two.

quote:

Okay, so people in portland (and i'm sure you know this of everyone in the capital and aren't making a generalization) like to have abortions for fun.

I wasn't making a generalization. I just just noted that there is a very stark difference between the young people in Portland, the young people in my hometown and other cities that I have lived in.

And I REALLY hope you didn't just imply that Portland is the capital of Oregon...

quote:

Who are we to decide who has the 'right to live.'

That statement is why I don't support Abortion. I apologize that I don't agree that an unborn fetus is just a blob of cells, and that I don't agree murderers deserve anything less than death. If America bans the death penalty, that's fine. But you can't make me like it.

quote:

quote:
Earthy have you ever seen the pictures of women who have bled to death because they sought out back door doctors. It's quite disturbing, more so, I believe, than the pictures of dead feti.



You're talking to someone who is going to become a Pathologist. I'm not that easily moved.

it's not the blood that's disturbing, it's the total loss of life. These women could have done something wonderful for this world and it was taken away from them.

As I have said before, abortions will happen regardless. Is it better to have women and the unborn die or just the unborn?

It's not totally irrevalent. Our justice system is based on this idea of an eye for an eye as was the ancient greeks. What they did seems stupid now right? Who's to say we won't be kicking ourselves in the future for being one of the last industrial nations to get rid of the death penalty?

Okay, so people in portland (and i'm sure you know this of everyone in the capital and aren't making a generalization) like to have abortions for fun.

Who are we to decide who has the 'right to live.'

quote:

Originally posted by Wolfie:
what does it say about our nation when we punish murder with murder?

In ancient greece, they too followed this eye for an eye policy. if a builder built a house and it collasped on the owner's son, then the builder's son would be put to death.

Why don't we just do that. Some drunk guy hits and kills someone's daughter, so we should just kill his daughter.

Congrats, you're now the Queen of Irrelevancy.

quote:

Earthy have you ever seen the pictures of women who have bled to death because they sought out back door doctors. It's quite disturbing, more so, I believe, than the pictures of dead feti.

You're talking to someone who is going to become a Pathologist. I'm not that easily moved.

quote:

People aren't like, 'Oh let me have as much unprotected sex as possible and if I get pregnant I'll just get one of those nifty abortions and continue the process.'

Actually many people are. You should live in Portland, OR for a while. People like that are the main reason why I made a complete 180 from Pro-Choice to Anti-Abortion.

quote:

But, and for the same reason that a baby is protected after it becomes viable, I'm against capital punishment. How is it that this still goes on in America, Land of the Free, Home of the Brave etc. ? For one of the most "progressive" countries in the world, you've managed to cling onto lots of the worse aspects of history that the rest of the West has shed. Capital punishment is brutal, awful and quite frankly condemnable wherever it is practised. The law should be disinterested and impartial in all cases, and this should include not being able to violate the rights of its citizens by killing people - criminals still retain rights. They are inalienable, right?

I agree to a certain extent, however I just can not accept the idea of someone who thinks all gay/white/black/whatever people should die and thinks it's fun to kill said people, deserves the right to live.

I would love to continue this, but I'm anemic and will have to put this off for a while.

what does it say about our nation when we punish murder with murder?

In ancient greece, they too followed this eye for an eye policy. if a builder built a house and it collasped on the owner's son, then the builder's son would be put to death.

Why don't we just do that. Some drunk guy hits and kills someone's daughter, so we should just kill his daughter.

quote:

Originally posted by Brehon:
Silly apathetic foetuses. When will they learn to get involved with the process?

haha I told you. Humor is the way to go sometimes.

quote:

Originally posted by Brehon:
As yet another vegetarian, I'm for the right for abortion up to viability - between 22-4 weeks and after. There is no reason to consider a foetus before this point as a life separate from its mother, as it is incapable of being separated from her and surviving. If the mother wants it removed, then it can and should be removed, like any unwanted bodily growth (that sounds callous, but based on a consideration of its faculties, true). However, as soon as it is capable of surviving on its own, the game changes and it should be protected, and, as it turns out, this is exactly what the law says in the UK.

See! Why can't the US Government be this logical?!? Is it because every single politician is blinded by a sick combination of "The Light of God" and their own shining ego?
Yes. Yes it is.

did i say a fucking wooden table? no. goddamn. lol.

Earthy have you ever seen the pictures of women who have bled to death because they sought out back door doctors. It's quite disturbing, more so, I believe, than the pictures of dead feti.

What do you mean I act like people randomly get pregnant. That's kind of how it happens when you aren't planning to have a child and you mess up your birth control method.

People aren't like, 'Oh let me have as much unprotected sex as possible and if I get pregnant I'll just get one of those nifty abortions and continue the process.'

quote:

unborn babies have done nothing,

Silly apathetic foetuses. When will they learn to get involved with the process?

quote:

Is a table dead?

Occasionally. This table I'm writing on is dead. Why do people always forget that wood was once alive?

ed. I was so disappointed that EG got to point this out before me. Damn.

Maybe I should actually make some serious contributions now.

quote:

Like I said, unborn babies have done nothing, which is why I think trying to save the life of a psychopathic murderer over someone who is innocent is hypocritical.

The only way this would work as an argument was if someone was aborting children because they thought foetuses were morally culpable. That is, presumably, the only way in which you can compare the two is if you put them both on trial, decide that the foetus is guilty and not the axe murderer. Another challenge, given the wording of this sentence (and I know I'm being overly pedantic, so feel free to ignore this) suggests that by aborting foetuses, you save psychopaths.

As yet another vegetarian, I'm for the right for abortion up to viability - between 22-4 weeks and after. There is no reason to consider a foetus before this point as a life separate from its mother, as it is incapable of being separated from her and surviving. If the mother wants it removed, then it can and should be removed, like any unwanted bodily growth (that sounds callous, but based on a consideration of its faculties, true). However, as soon as it is capable of surviving on its own, the game changes and it should be protected, and, as it turns out, this is exactly what the law says in the UK.

But, and for the same reason that a baby is protected after it becomes viable, I'm against capital punishment. How is it that this still goes on in America, Land of the Free, Home of the Brave etc. ? For one of the most "progressive" countries in the world, you've managed to cling onto lots of the worse aspects of history that the rest of the West has shed. Capital punishment is brutal, awful and quite frankly condemnable wherever it is practised. The law should be disinterested and impartial in all cases, and this should include not being able to violate the rights of its citizens by killing people - criminals still retain rights. They are inalienable, right?

quote:

Anything that isn't living is dead??? No, something that was at one point alive and then is killed is dead. Are rocks dead? Is dirt dead? Is a table dead? seriously.

My bad. (However, technically a wooden table would be dead as it is made of dead trees.)

Regardless, a fetus is not comparable to dirt, rocks or any other inanimate object, because it is comprised of living, multiplying cells. You cut it out of its mother and it dies and decays. Therefore, going by your own logic, it is alive.

quote:

Yeah you're not pro-life like I said. You're anti abortion as you said. ie against freedom of choice.

Oh well.

quote:

No one should have the right to take the life of under person whether it is by literally killing them or saddling them with something they don't want that will in essence "take away their life."

You make it sound like women just randomly become pregnant without having any responsibility in the matter.

Anyway, if you can't see why I don't think sociopathic murderers (like that one prisoner in Utah who stabbed a fellow black inmate who he believed was gay to death and shouted stuff about White Power while the other white inmates cheered him on) deserve more of a life than a "blob of cells", then I'm sorry, but that's just how it is for me.

Please feel free to visit:

http://tinyurl.com/d4k23b

Supporting comments are always welcome.

quote:

Originally posted by EarthGoddess:
Anything that isn't living is dead. According to science anyway. I don't know how stuff works in whatever parallel universe you reside in, but here if it's not alive, it's dead (or if it's a zombie, it's undead).

Anything that isn't living is dead??? No, something that was at one point alive and then is killed is dead. Are rocks dead? Is dirt dead? Is a table dead? seriously.

Yeah you're not pro-life like I said. You're anti abortion as you said. ie against freedom of choice.

No one should have the right to take the life of under person whether it is by literally killing them or saddling them with something they don't want that will in essence "take away their life."

i am also veggie.

Oooh, I see now where all this "fetuses aren't alive" BS is coming from. You're comparing them to viruses aren't you?

-_-

Anything that isn't living is dead. According to science anyway. I don't know how stuff works in whatever parallel universe you reside in, but here if it's not alive, it's dead (or if it's a zombie, it's undead).

Like I said, unborn babies have done nothing, which is why I think trying to save the life of a psychopathic murderer over someone who is innocent is hypocritical.

I never said I was pro-life. Please point to where I said that. I am simply anti-abortion (again, except in extreme cases of course).

I'm vegetarian! I don't support the war. And murderers in jail usually end up killing other inmates, so like the vicious animals they are, sometimes they need to be put down.

when did I ever say "something dead becomes alive." Is it possible for you to post without trying to put words in people's mouths as an attempt to justify what you say.

So you're saying it'd be alright then to abort before the age of 4 weeks. So you are for abortion. ^.^ mmm words in mouth

So basically you are against abortions but you support capital punishment. Wow, so you're really not pro-life, you're just against the freedom to choose.

Do you consider a blob of cells worth saving because that is all a fetus is.

Like I said before, if you are so against killing these unborn babies because they "feel" what about the animals in the slaughterhouses what about the people we kill in the war, what about the people we kill in jail.

I'm sorry this is why people who are "pro-life" are idiots. They're like "oh praise jesus we have to save this innocent baby and ruin someone elses life but when he grows up in a shitty environment and then kills someone we're going to see to it he burns in hell! Anyone want steak for dinner?"


People are so dumb.

They need to think without bias otherwise we're all fucked.

quote:

Originally posted by Wolfie:
feti can't feel, so they don't care whether or not they are killed.

however, the grown man who kills someone can feel, just like the woman who wants an abortion can feel.

why should someone who can't feel a thing be given more rights than someone who can?

why should a fetus be allowed to live over a cow that is sent to the slaughter house? what feels more? the cow and yet it is okay to cause it pain?

lol, what's worse? being killed or being in solitary confinement the rest of your life?

no one has the right to take the life of a living being, I'm sorry but fetus aren't alive, which is why it isn't considered double murder unless the women is 6 months pregnant.

So are you against using embryos in stem cell research as well? those poor little things have souls in them.

lol.

people need to think like robots... what is the most efficent way of doing something... it is the only way shit will actually get done in this god foresaken land.

The nervous system of a fetus develops at around 4-5 weeks. At that point, when it's nervous system is brand new, it's hyper-sensitive to any and all stimuli. In other words, it feels worse pain at than you can even imagine, just by being touched.

Solitary confinement for life is as cruel as you can get, especially when you're against torture. Many criminals put in solitary confinement end up taking their own lives.

And please explain how something dead can suddenly become alive. That makes zero sense, unless magic really does exist. As long as it is being fed by blood supplied by it's mother, it's very much alive. I think you meant to say "it's not a person".

I only support abortion in extreme cases (ectopic pregnancies, rape, etc), not because "oops, condom broke lol", but I don't believe those fetuses should just be thrown away. If they absolutely must be sacrificed then I'd rather it not be in vain. So I do support stem cell research.

quote:

... except for all the people he kills.

True, but according to liberals, that's a less severe crime than being conceived. Obviously.

feti can't feel, so they don't care whether or not they are killed.

however, the grown man who kills someone can feel, just like the woman who wants an abortion can feel.

why should someone who can't feel a thing be given more rights than someone who can?

why should a fetus be allowed to live over a cow that is sent to the slaughter house? what feels more? the cow and yet it is okay to cause it pain?

lol, what's worse? being killed or being in solitary confinement the rest of your life?

no one has the right to take the life of a living being, I'm sorry but fetus aren't alive, which is why it isn't considered double murder unless the women is 6 months pregnant.

So are you against using embryos in stem cell research as well? those poor little things have souls in them.

lol.

people need to think like robots... what is the most efficent way of doing something... it is the only way shit will actually get done in this god foresaken land.

quote:

Originally posted by EarthGoddess:
Everybody wins.

... except for all the people he kills.

Well then if he did grow into a sociopath, he'll get to kill people and have the luxury of idiots protesting his right to live. Everybody wins.

It makes no sense how an unborn baby who has done nothing to harm anyone, has less of a right to live than someone who has.

what if the innocent unborn baby grew into a sociopath because his mom was a 15 year old coke head who has no idea how to raise a child and continously blows snow for her whole pregnancy?