OT: "Procedure" tomorrow

I know where you're coming from, and I do wish you all the best. Truly enjoy your life whilst you can. My older brother died on Sunday. He was 62.

-- Kevin Aylward

I feel I should at this point apologise for the remarks made by my fellow countryman, Kev. He and the poster "tabbypurr" are both singularly ill- informed on this issue. Their ignorance is only matched by their indefatigable ability to repeat the same dogma over and over and over again. You will never win an argument against them; they simply won't listen to reason. Do yourself a big favour and mark the thread "ignore" in your newsreader. You'll save yourself from a huge amount of wasted time.

Welcome back, Jim! The Lefties were getting a bit of a free run in your absence, spreading their old, discredited nonsense around. ;->

I agree.

I was actually trying to highlight here when the Jury is deciding whether or not to execute, assuming the determination of guilt has already been made.

The ethical issues are way different for the Jury deciding to kill someone, rather than just determining their guilt.

Support for the death penalty is clearly eroding in the US. I take the view that there is only one single factor as to why the death penalty in the US has not been eliminated. My opinion is this:

State legislators make their determination as to whether or not to support or oppose the death penalty based solely on their estimation of whether or not they will gain or lose election votes on the matter.

So, in what universe is it ethical to kill someone based on a politician's election votes?

Noting that one idea in the US Bill of Rights is protection of the minority from the tyranny of a 51% majority.

-- Kevin Aylward

I appreciate the support.

I did find the word "illiterate" somewhat amusing in as much as that it is typically the "intellectuals" that present the reasoned arguments on ethical issues rather than the redneck southerners.

-- Kevin Aylward

I'm sorry, I can't hear you...Obama is in my telephone again. Darn it Obama, I told you this was my private line!

I think what I wrote is pretty clear. I don't have any idea how you got that equivalence from it.

I wonder if the same rule applies to the executioner?

One might argue that in a society which is intrinsically just, the chances are good that the death penalty will be used, in the main, for just reasons.

If a society is unjust in the fashion that reason is consistently made a mockery of, then even if the death penalty is "illegal" it hardly matters, they'll simply find punishments which are worse than death.

That is to say, obsessing over its legality or illegality is fretting the symptoms, not the disease.

re

on

ck

you were speaking as if unintentionally causing someones death by placing a wrong sign etc. is som how comparable to intentionally killing someone

Glad you are doing better. Did they give you any idea why installing a stent in your bile duct would impact the kidneys? Was it just a response to the surgery or the anesthesia?

I was comparing the issue of the state making a mistake in executing an innocent person compared to the many other ways we unintentionally kill people. I think if you again read what I wrote you will see this clearly.

This is an emotional issue because we want to believe our legal system is just and accurate. It is neither. But in general it works better than many of our systems including ones that are also life and death.

I'm not saying we shouldn't try our hardest to prevent innocent punishments (this goes much further than just executions). Just the opposite. I'm also not saying we should never execute anyone or should not halt executions. I'm just saying that this issue should be considered in the context of the rest of our lives.

Yeah, just like your political theroeis LOL!!! :->

Don't lie to us! We all know all you have is the party line.

No, it's obvious that either you're illiterate or trolling. Hint: Murder killing

Ouch. Nasty.

Best wishes from us, Jim.

--sp

Cursitor Doom is even more ill-informed on most issues, and even more prone to promote dogma that he doesn't remotely comprehend. Kill-filing him will save you from at least as much nonsense as kill-filing Kevin Aylward, but where Kevin does have useful - in fact very well-informed - opinions on som e subjects of electronic interest (his Super Spice really work, and works w ell) Cursitor Doom is a compete waste of space.

Jim-out-of-touch-with-reality-Thompson has his own discredited nonsense to spread around, some of which lines up with Cursitor Doom's discredited nons ense.

The right-wing lunatics do take up a lot of space around here, but none of them is remotely capable of discrediting any kind of rational argument (not that they can recognise rational argument when they see it, let alone when they have been trounced by it).