ELEPHANT-DONKEY.com

Well, I prefer therapy and mostly prevention of murders by the same guy, instead of going, "Off with their neck!". (Yeah, call me a softie) However, this debate I agree with swdowning because of one reason he summed up in his last argument - unborn babies don't have a tendency to be serial killers.

CorruptAbramoff | 10/05/08

you sure the PERSON interupting the BOOK didn't just write the wrong word from Hebrew to English. what is the punishment in death? you don't have to suffer anymore with guilt, you don't have to suffer from attachment, and there is no more pain in your life? Having them live in a **** world like prision would be much worse then death. Also if you want to give the impression that even the worst can be saved and changed you shouldn't just kill the few you can't work with.

Salty_Dick | 10/05/08

It really is an inconsistent position, to argue that all life is sacred and on the same hand to try to argue that we as humans have a right to decide who should live and who should die. Not to mention, for every person executed who is later found innocent, there is absolutely no justification for the state (I use this term in the sense of a governing body, not exactly any particular state). Plus, with our complicated system of judicial appeals, it costs more money in the end to execute someone than to keep them in prison for life, where they could at least be used for manual labor.

qbpuck321 | 10/05/08

While I am pro-choice and anti death penalty I do agree with swdowning that there is no moral inconsistency.

Tickers | 10/05/08

The death of a murderous monster. Is the same as the death of a fetus. There shouldn't be abortions and there shouldn't be death penalties. What we need is life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. Executions are expensive.

mockingbird | 10/05/08

A lot of us left-wingers are religious, too. If you break down a liberal candidate's issues and positions, most of the time it will be (sometimes point by point) very similar to the sermon on the mount, or the beatitudes. And a lot of us are pro-choice and anti-abortion, in fact I think we all can agree with the goal of zero abortions. I personally am very anti-abortion, but I'm sure not willing to let the government take over the deciding. Which used to be considered a pretty conservative position. Seems like us liberals don't see the difference in the killing, I reject the theology of a just war or a righteous killing, Jesus was very clear on the no killing of any kind for any reason. We reject the platform of no abortions, lots of executions and pre-emptive war whenever convenient. We also take some responsibility for the babies who are born, after they are born. Cutting social programs that benefit children and mothers is as wrong as executing people, and as wrong as starting wars. Pro-life should be pro-any life with no exceptions.

thejanet | 10/05/08

Salty: It's not a matter of translation. The Decalogue is found in Exodus and Deuteronomy, so it's a part of Jewish and Christian theology. While there have been translations from the Hebrew, as well as many publications, the Hebrew word that is used in the sixth commandment is well known, and there's no evidence that it isn't the same word. The Hebrew word for "kill" is "harog"; the Hebrew word for "murder" is "retzach." It is the latter word that is used in the Torah. Also, it's not correct to claim that people would rather be executed instead of being imprisoned for life. There are of course some exceptions, but most people in this situation do whatever they can to avoid the death penalty. Look at the deals that prosecutors offer. How many of those deals offer the death penalty instead of life in exchange for cooperation? qbpuck: I think that reducing our death penalty positions to a cost:benefits ratio is the wrong way to go. We're talking about the value of human life. If we start assessing the death penalty in terms of financial costs, then I fear we risk a slippery slope that could extend to elder care, children born with birth defects, and perhaps those who are merely inconvenient. We're also talking about the message that our legal system sends. With capital punishment, we send the message that one cannot illegally take the life of a non-murderous human and still retain the right to keep his own life. We also provide a measure of closure to the victim's family, and prevent the murderer from killing again.

swdowning | 10/06/08

thejanet: Is there any war worth fighting? Should we not have opposed Adolf Hitler? How about Stalin, or Pol Pot? Do you think that this world would respect the rights of man to the extent it does today if the U.S. had not entered and fought and won the wars it did? You seem to suggest that we should not have any right to enter a conflict militarily. Is this what you really believe?

swdowning | 10/06/08

That last argument is a doozy. I have always just thought that conservatives didn't have a brain, but swdowning has made a great point. I have to reconsider my entire approach to this issue.

mrelish | 10/06/08