To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 26652
26651  |  26653
Subject: 
Re: Excellent news!
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Thu, 3 Mar 2005 17:36:18 GMT
Viewed: 
1013 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:

   If life is most precious, than can we conclude that the willful taking of an innocent life is the most heinous crime one can commit, only exceeded by the number of lives taken? If we truly value life (speaking as a society now) as most precious, shouldn’t our intolerance of those who disregard life be ultimate? If we do not say to willful murderers, “We regard life so precious that the punishment for taking life is the ultimate one”, do we in fact really uphold life as most precious?. Because if murder is only punished by life imprisonment (loss of liberty), doesn’t that effectively equate murder with other crimes such as rape, theft, drug usuage? The penalty is the same, and in many cases, the same duration.

First, a quote:

“You won’t have Dick Nixon to kick around anymore.”

-Dick Nixon (to the press, after losing the governor’s race in California, who, sure enough, didn’t have the wisdom to stick with his promise and got the ultimate kicking around)

So welcome back to debate! ;-)

Murder carries the stiffest penalties as it is without the death penalty, so it seems that you are applying something of a either a false analogy or have a separate complaint about sloppily and inconsistently applied penalties. I will certainly agree that there are penalties that are inconsistent with the crime, usually for political expediency, but that seems to me more an argument for getting them under control rather than just upping the ante.

  
Indeed, is it not even offensive that heinous murderers are allowed to retain that which is most precious when they didn’t afford the same to their victims? Keeping them alive doesn’t uphold the value of life; ending theirs does-- the precious lives of their victims.

Assure me that everyone ever executed was guilty and I’ll agree to the death penalty. If not, then we have murdered the innocent in the name of justice.

And, of course, we have. In theory then, all those that support the death penalty should be executed. :-O

-->Bruce<--



Message has 2 Replies:
  Re: Excellent news!
 
(...) Thanks. Resume kicking position:-) (...) Well, humans only live so long. I see little difference in a sentence of 40 years and one of 3 consecutive life sentences. I love it when someone becomes eligible for parole after a couple of hundred (...) (19 years ago, 4-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
  Re: Excellent news!
 
(...) Well, (URL) this guy> wasn't executed, but the point is served. Dave! (19 years ago, 4-Apr-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Excellent news!
 
(...) Who told you that!?? Was it one of my jerk employees?[1] (...) I agree with your assessments. I think that if certain individuals hadn't valued liberty more than life, our country wouldn't have been formed, and generally speaking, liberty for (...) (19 years ago, 3-Mar-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

55 Messages in This Thread:












Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR