Death Penalty in China

[Cleon]

Has anyone else noticed that it seems like the most firm anti-abortion folks who defend the sanctity of human life above all else also support the death penalty?

While that's probably generally true, and certainly makes for some interesting excuse-making (especially by those who call themselves "pro-life"), there are significant exceptions. The Catholic Church, for example, is both anti-abortion and anti-death penalty.

 

[Katana]

While that's probably generally true, and certainly makes for some interesting excuse-making (especially by those who call themselves "pro-life"), there are significant exceptions. The Catholic Church, for example, is both anti-abortion and anti-death penalty.

I'll agree with you there.

 

[CFLarsen]

The above requires the question, What do you believe constitutes cruel and unusual punishment as defined in the 8th amendment?

That's my point: It is up to us, right now, to decide what constitutes "cruel and unusual punishment". It isn't written down in the US Constitution what that means.

Would this apply to the prison system too? What if I do not have a desire to view a prison or visit a prison; should I then hold the position that prisons not be used?

Why shouldn't it? Do you have a problem with viewing a prison or visiting a prison?

Does this logic apply to other things as well? Perhaps I do not wish to watch surgery performed; should I then be opposed to surgery because I choose not to witness it? Am I a hypocrite for supporting surgery whilst not wishing to bear witness to it?

We are talking about a punishment for crimes.

If the death penalty is to be used as a deterrent, wouldn’t it be a stronger deterrent if it were done as publicly, gruesomely and painfully as possible?

Not that I advocate this at all, just a thought.

Discussed here.

 

[Santa666]

That's my point: It is up to us, right now, to decide what constitutes "cruel and unusual punishment". It isn't written down in the US Constitution what that means.

Certainly you do not consider feeding some alive to lions not to be cruel or unusual?

Why shouldn't it? Do you have a problem with viewing a prison or visiting a prison?

Let's say I do have a problem viewing and visiting any prison. Should I then be branded hypocrite for promoting the use of the prison system?

We are talking about a punishment for crimes.

Why does this line a reasoning end with punishment for crimes? Why is it ok to call someone a hypocrite for not wishing to witness the death penalty, but still use it, yet it is not ok to call someone a hypocrite for not wishing to watch surgery, but still use it?


Santa

 

[CFLarsen]

Certainly you do not consider feeding some alive to lions not to be cruel or unusual?

Of course I consider feeding people to the lions cruel and unusual.

The point is: Society deems what is cruel and unusual, at any given time. Look at how the death penalty - state sanctioned murder - has "progressed" in the past 200 years. Not a lot of public hangings anymore, hm?

Let's say I do have a problem viewing and visiting any prison. Should I then be branded hypocrite for promoting the use of the prison system?

Yes.

Why does this line a reasoning end with punishment for crimes? Why is it ok to call someone a hypocrite for not wishing to witness the death penalty, but still use it, yet it is not ok to call someone a hypocrite for not wishing to watch surgery, but still use it?

Because we are discussing crimes and what constitutes cruel or unusual punishment.

 

[Santa666]

Yes.



Because we are discussing crimes and what constitutes cruel or unusual punishment.

Could you please provide some elaboartion as to why, if I do not wish to view or visit a prison, I should then not promote the use of them?


I fail to see why an almost identical analogy, though not applicable to crime/punishment cannot be used. If I do not wish to witness surgery, then, according to you, I should not support the use of surgery.

 

[Grammatron]

There is nothing in the Founding Papers - the Holy Trinity of the United Stated of America -

You really want to open up that discussion again CFL? Last time I checked it was you who stopped posting on that thread.

that prevents criminals from being thrown to the lions.

Based on previous supreme court cases of what constitutes "cruel and unusual" throwing people to Lions would certainly be it. If you disagree I want you present me with your research as to why you think it's not, otherwise don't waste bandwith on this one.

 

[Grammatron]

I think so.

If you want a certain kind of punishment for other people, the very least you should do is have the guts to see it carried out.

Does that mean if you are pro-abortion you should watch every abortion performed?

 

[Cleon]

Does that mean if you are pro-abortion you should watch every abortion performed?

Well, I'm not sure the analogy really holds. The fact is, if the doctor and patient are both willing, there's no legal restriction keeping you from watching.

With capital punishment, this is not the case. I recall some years back--please don't ask me to dig up sources, I'm working on memory here--Phil Donahue wanted to broadcast video footage of an execution. The condemned (and the condemned's family) was ok with it. The district attorney and the State, however, were not.

So if the condemned is ok with a film of the execution being made public, why shouldn't it be permitted?

 

[CFLarsen]

Could you please provide some elaboartion as to why, if I do not wish to view or visit a prison, I should then not promote the use of them?

Nothing much to elaborate on. I just find it hypocritical that you cannot stand to watch the punishment you dish out to other people.

I fail to see why an almost identical analogy, though not applicable to crime/punishment cannot be used. If I do not wish to witness surgery, then, according to you, I should not support the use of surgery.

We disagree, then.

You really want to open up that discussion again CFL? Last time I checked it was you who stopped posting on that thread.

Where, in the Constitution, does it say anything specifically about how the state can kill people?

Based on previous supreme court cases of what constitutes "cruel and unusual" throwing people to Lions would certainly be it. If you disagree I want you present me with your research as to why you think it's not, otherwise don't waste bandwith on this one.

I point to the change of execution methods over time.

Does that mean if you are pro-abortion you should watch every abortion performed?

Do you consider abortions punishment?

 

[Grammatron]

Well, I'm not sure the analogy really holds. The fact is, if the doctor and patient are both willing, there's no legal restriction keeping you from watching.

With capital punishment, this is not the case. I recall some years back--please don't ask me to dig up sources, I'm working on memory here--Phil Donahue wanted to broadcast video footage of an execution. The condemned (and the condemned's family) was ok with it. The district attorney and the State, however, were not.

I doubt people will let abortion be broadcast either.

So if the condemned is ok with a film of the execution being made public, why shouldn't it be permitted?

I don't know, I am not said district attorney.

My point is that the argument that pro-death penalty people don't want to see execution is a non starter.

 

[Grammatron]

Where, in the Constitution, does it say anything specifically about how the state can kill people?

Read Supreme Court cases, federal and state laws dealing with death penalty.

Also, did you know there's nothing in the Constitution about giving speeding tickets on an interstates and yet....

I point to the change of execution methods over time.

See above.

Do you consider abortions punishment?

Answer my question first and I will answer yours.

 

[CFLarsen]

Read Supreme Court cases, federal and state laws dealing with death penalty.

You brought up the Constitution. Where, in the Constitution, does it say anything specifically about how the state can kill people?

Also, did you know there's nothing in the Constitution about giving speeding tickets on an interstates and yet....

See above.

Precisely. How the state kills its own citizens is not written down in the Constitution.

Answer my question first and I will answer yours.

I already answered it: We are discussing crimes and what constitutes cruel or unusual punishment.

Do you consider abortions punishment?

 

[Grammatron]

You brought up the Constitution. Where, in the Constitution, does it say anything specifically about how the state can kill people?

You asked what prevents the government from throwing people to the Lions and I pointed to the 8th amendment. Now you are asking for interpretation of that amendment and you must look at SCOTUS rulings and then federal and state laws that stem from it. This is how the legal system works in our country.

Precisely. How the state kills its own citizens is not written down in the Constitution.

This is correct.

I already answered it: We are discussing crimes and what constitutes cruel or unusual punishment.

No, you did not; it was a yes or no question and your answer is neither.

 

[CFLarsen]

You asked what prevents the government from throwing people to the Lions and I pointed to the 8th amendment. Now you are asking for interpretation of that amendment and you must look at SCOTUS rulings and then federal and state laws that stem from it. This is how the legal system works in our country.
...
This is correct.

Then, it is not the 8th amendment that prevents the government from throwing people to the lions, but the courts that interpret it.

No, you did not; it was a yes or no question and your answer is neither.

The question is irrelevant to what we are discussing: Crimes and what constitutes cruel or unusual punishment.

Do you consider abortions punishment?

 

[Grammatron]

Then, it is not the 8th amendment that prevents the government from throwing people to the lions...

Wrong.

The question is irrelevant to what we are discussing.

I guess you don't want to answer it then, your choice I guess.

 

[CFLarsen]

Wrong.

Wrong? How is that wrong?

I guess you don't want to answer it then, your choice Iguess.

It's not a question of not wanting to answer it. It is just irrelevant to the discussion about punishment.

Do you consider abortions punishment?

 

[Grammatron]

Wrong? How is that wrong?

I've explained it already. I will do so again now:

You asked what prevents the government from throwing people to the Lions and I pointed to the 8th amendment. Now you are asking for interpretation of that amendment and you must look at SCOTUS rulings and then federal and state laws that stem from it. This is how the legal system works in our country.

 

[CFLarsen]

I've explained it already. I will do so again now:

You asked what prevents the government from throwing people to the Lions and I pointed to the 8th amendment. Now you are asking for interpretation of that amendment and you must look at SCOTUS rulings and then federal and state laws that stem from it. This is how the legal system works in our country.

There is nothing in the 8th amendment that prevents people from being subjected to the cruel and unusual punishment it would be to be thrown to the lions.

It is the courts that decide that being thrown to the lions is cruel and unusual.

 

[Cleon]

I doubt people will let abortion be broadcast either.

Actually, it's happened. Google "abortion broadcast."

My point is that the argument that pro-death penalty people don't want to see execution is a non starter.

I would agree with that, to an extent.

However, it's when DP supporters won't permit executions to be public that my eyebrows start to go up.