It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

For the last time....Pro-life/Pro-death penalty "hypocrisy"...

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 01:14 AM
link   
WWJD? Suffer not the children, but those crimminals are gonna pay, sucka!





posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 01:21 AM
link   
It's good to see that that those advocating the death penalty are starting to realise it's not a deterrent, seeing as that is the only reason for its existence under law.

Now if they could just figure out what place revenge or vengeance has to do with civilised justice we might just be getting somewhere...



posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 08:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by kegs
It's good to see that that those advocating the death penalty are starting to realise it's not a deterrent, seeing as that is the only reason for its existence under law.


Actually, the death penalty IS a deterrent. For one thing, it would ensure that the murderer will never kill again.

The more executions that take place, the more your murder rate drops.


Now if they could just figure out what place revenge or vengeance has to do with civilised justice we might just be getting somewhere...


Would you consider imprisoning criminals to be revenge? With imprisonment the prisoner pays with his time. With the death penalty the prisoner pays with his life.

To me, imprisonment instead of death for a murderer cheapens the victim's life.



posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amethyst

Actually, the death penalty IS a deterrent. For one thing, it would ensure that the murderer will never kill again.

The more executions that take place, the more your murder rate drops.


It's true a murderer cannot kill again, it doesn't do anything to deter the next one from doing it...it's just not an effective deterrent. If your supposition was correct, we'd see obviously higher murder rates in those states/nations which didn't have the death penalty - and that's not the case.


Take a look here



Would you consider imprisoning criminals to be revenge? With imprisonment the prisoner pays with his time. With the death penalty the prisoner pays with his life.


A sentence of LWOP also makes the prisoner pay with his life - only over a longer period. Some would argue this is actually more of a punishment.



To me, imprisonment instead of death for a murderer cheapens the victim's life.


To me, the death penalty cheapens the victim's life. What does it accomplish? All too often, the family never gets closure; some even feel worse, because there's guilt from another life being taken. It doesn't bring back the victim.



posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Interesting. I don't believe we have the right MORALLY to take another human being's life. Isn't that murder? Only if my life was at stake would I even consider it - in self-defense - and even then, I would have a real hard time living with it.

And I believe God said, "Vengeance is mine". That seems pretty clear to me. But I'm sure someone will be willing to tell me what he meant by that.



posted on Oct, 2 2005 @ 12:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic

And I believe God said, "Vengeance is mine". That seems pretty clear to me. But I'm sure someone will be willing to tell me what he meant by that.


Well it seems that "Vengeance" "judgment" and "execution" is only for human consumption and interpretation.


We all know that the "Moral Majority" already has their own way to tell you what it means.

We all play gods one way or another in this world and with this human life.



posted on Oct, 13 2005 @ 07:39 AM
link   
Those such as myself who believe in pro life (personally) and that includes the dealth penalty.

Where's the hypocrisy in that? I don't see it.

I do too see the hypocrisy on both sides though, generally speaking.

If you are talking to the hypocrites who support life and the death penalty i apologise, I just wanted to throw my 2 cents in since I dont want to be stereotyped into that generalization. Now you know where I stand.

peace.



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 03:40 AM
link   
General Ideological Topics
Discuss the merits of liberal, conservative, libertarian, etc. political ideologies and politicians.

Social Issues
Review issues related to social programs, the arts, and immigration.

or

Medical Issues
Discussion issues such as stem cell research, abortion, and health care costs.


---

Can someone put this in the right place please?

---

Back to the question/point itself.

There is a large difference between killing a "criminal" than their is killing an unborn child, anyone should be able to see this. I myself am "Pro" to both. In a perfect world, we wouldn't need to have abortions nor would we have to have the death penalty - in fact their would be no crime, but there is and some people [and their actions] removes their rights to life.

Sorry, but that is the way it sometimes is...

[edit on 20/10/2005 by Odium]



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by koji_K
So, life isn't sacred after all then? People against the right to abortion claim that the fetus must live, no matter what, because all life is sacred. I'll say it again, with caps for emphasis: ALL life. Even life that has not distinguished itself in any way. So, this clearly doesn't hold if you believe human beings can make the determination as to when and how a life is no longer sacred. It's simple. If some life isn't sacred after all, then not all life is sacred! Hypocrisy, plain and simple.
[edit on 21-5-2005 by koji_K]


Thank you Koji! Someone with common sense!

All life is Sacred (in my beliefs)! We should not be killing anyone!

Now, about the death penalty! In itself the Death Penalty is hypocrisy. Come on, how can you tell someone that killing is wrong, and then say that you are going to kill then as a punishment? What ever happened to the saying: Two WRONGS Do NOT make a RIGHT!

"An eye for an eye, and the world goes blind!"

Tim



posted on Oct, 20 2005 @ 12:45 PM
link   
ghost, the death penalty should only be used on people who will always reoffend and on crimes which are so bad that the risk is too great.

To be honest, if you kill 5 people I do not want the Government spending £16,000 per-year on you, for the rest of your life. I would rather that £16,000 goes into the education system.

Now think...that's 1person...think about 1000 people, 10,000 and so on...



posted on Nov, 2 2005 @ 06:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
To be honest, if you kill 5 people I do not want the Government spending £16,000 per-year on you, for the rest of your life. I would rather that £16,000 goes into the education system.


I'll give you that one. I'm not sure how much that is in US money, but I can find better things to spend it on then a dangerous killer!

Tim



posted on Nov, 2 2005 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amethyst
Bible is pro-death penalty an anti-abortion.





Maybe if you don't count kids who are already born. Remember when God killed ALL the firstborn of Egypt? There's other parts where the Israelites are told to kill all their enemies, even the children. But that doesn't matter, it's only bad if they're unborn...




top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join