Death Penalty

[Nebuchadnezzar]

I just watched a Documentary about Todd Willingham. A man executed in Texas for the murder of his three children by arson.

It has now been proven that the fire was an accidental fire...PROVEN! And this man was innocent and put to death. Investigators even proved that it was an accidental fire before the execution but they went ahead anyway.

This is why I'm against the Death Penalty. This is why everyone should be against the Death Penalty.

[CKwi88]

(09-04-2015, 05:46 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: I just watched a Documentary about Todd Willingham. A man executed in Texas for the murder of his three children by arson.

It has now been proven that the fire was an accidental fire...PROVEN! And this man was innocent and put to death. Investigators even proved that it was an accidental fire before the execution but they went ahead anyway.

This is why I'm against the Death Penalty. This is why everyone should be against the Death Penalty.

It's certainly number 2 on my short list against the death penalty. Our system is way too absurdly flawed to dole out a punishment like that. 

Couple that with it being a waste of money and a waste of time and a waste of human life....yeah, I have a hard time getting on board with the death penalty. 

[BmorePat87]

we talked about this earlier in the Candidate profile thread about Rick Perry and how he ignored all of this and got rid of the person who was trying to do something about it.

[SunsetBengal]

(09-04-2015, 06:02 PM)CKwi88 Wrote: It's certainly number 2 on my short list against the death penalty. Our system is way too absurdly flawed to dole out a punishment like that. 

Couple that with it being a waste of money and a waste of time and a waste of human life....yeah, I have a hard time getting on board with the death penalty. 

Hey, look on the bright side..  At least our Nation is doing any and everything within it's power to put an end to an evil regime that beheads, drowns, shoots, throws from roof tops, burns, and otherwise executes with any means possible, anyone that does not agree with their religious ideology.  Wait.. 

[CKwi88]

(09-04-2015, 07:30 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Hey, look on the bright side..  At least our Nation is doing any and everything within it's power to put an end to an evil regime that beheads, drowns, shoots, throws from roof tops, burns, and otherwise executes with any means possible, anyone that does not agree with their religious ideology.  Wait.. 

Well that hyperbolic nonsense sure has nothing to do with this thread...

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(09-04-2015, 07:30 PM)SunsetBengal rain Wrote: Hey, look on the bright side..  At least our Nation is doing any and everything within it's power to put an end to an evil regime that beheads, drowns, shoots, throws from roof tops, burns, and otherwise executes with any means possible, anyone that does not agree with their religious ideology.  Wait.. 

Actually, 1% of our nation has deployed to Afghanistan or Iraq to do what you made light of. I'm a part of the 1%. I've got a case of beer says you're a part of the other 99%.

[GodHatesBengals]

(09-04-2015, 07:30 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Hey, look on the bright side..  At least our Nation is doing any and everything within it's power to put an end to an evil regime that beheads, drowns, shoots, throws from roof tops, burns, and otherwise executes with any means possible, anyone that does not agree with their religious ideology.  Wait.. 

Utterly off-topic.

[*bfine32*]

(09-04-2015, 05:46 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: I just watched a Documentary about Todd Willingham. A man executed in Texas for the murder of his three children by arson.

It has now been proven that the fire was an accidental fire...PROVEN! And this man was innocent and put to death. Investigators even proved that it was an accidental fire before the execution but they went ahead anyway.

This is why I'm against the Death Penalty. This is why everyone should be against the Death Penalty.

I feel the Death Penalty should be reserved for extreme cases; however, it should not be banned.

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-04-2015, 07:17 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: we talked about this earlier in the Candidate profile thread about Rick Perry and how he ignored all of this and got rid of the person who was trying to do something about it.

Thanks. I couldn't remember what thread it was in.

[Benton]

(09-04-2015, 10:16 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I feel the Death Penalty should be reserved for extreme cases; however, it should not be banned.

I disagree. 

It's pretty evenly a mix between religious beliefs and unnecessary, and too often mistakenly applied, executions. In covering executions and courts, I've gotten to know volunteers with Project Innocence. If anyone thinks Willingham's case is in the minority, contact someone with PI. They work to correct some of the many errors made in capital punishment cases, of which there are many. Willingham's is just a bit better known since Rick Perry — a great big bucket of lying sleaze in a suit — was running for higher office while covering up the erroneous execution on his watch.

But I've never gotten over the irony of so many people banging their chests about this being a Christian nation — about how bad gay marriage and abortion and teaching evolution are — but are quick to flip on ol' sparky.

[*rfaulk34*]

(09-04-2015, 10:44 PM)Benton Wrote:  Rick Perry — a great big bucket of lying sleaze in a suit — 

Thank you. I was hoping i wasn't the only one that held this belief.

[*bfine32*]

(09-04-2015, 10:44 PM)Benton Wrote: But I've never gotten over the irony of so many people banging their chests about this being a Christian nation — about how bad gay marriage and abortion and teaching evolution are — but are quick to flip on ol' sparky.

..and I've never gotten over the irony of so many people banging their chests about being a scientific nation- about how bad capital punishment and religious freedoms are - but are quick to support killing an innocent living being 

My opinion of Capital Punishment and abortion are the same; both should be reserved for extreme cases

[GodHatesBengals]

(09-04-2015, 10:58 PM)bfine32 Wrote: ..and I've never gotten over the irony of so many people banging their chests about being a scientific nation- about how bad capital punishment and religious freedoms are - but a quick to support killing an innocent living being 

I honestly don't think that I've ever met anyone who opposes religious freedoms--unless you consider "religious freedom" to include "the freedom to infringe on others' rights because your religious beliefs said to". Which you probably do.

[*bfine32*]

(09-04-2015, 11:01 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: I honestly don't think that I've ever met anyone who opposes religious freedoms--unless you consider "religious freedom" to include "the freedom to infringe on others' rights because your religious beliefs said to". Which you probably do.

You should get out more. Haven't we already discussed the issue with assumptions?

[GodHatesBengals]

(09-04-2015, 11:09 PM)bfine32 Wrote: You should get out more. Haven't we already discussed the issue with assumptions?

Which assumption was that?

Care to share with us which religious freedom is being threatened that *isn't* the freedom to infringe on others' rights?

[*bfine32*]

(09-04-2015, 11:14 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Which assumption was that?

GodHatesBengals Wrote:I honestly don't think that I've ever met anyone who opposes religious freedoms--unless you consider "religious freedom" to include "the freedom to infringe on others' rights because your religious beliefs said to". Which you probably do.

GodHatesBengals Wrote:Care to share with us which religious freedom is being threatened that *isn't* the freedom to infringe on others' rights?

Foe whoever "us" is:
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/10/religious-liberty-and-expression-under-attack-restoring-americas-first-freedoms

[GodHatesBengals]

(09-04-2015, 11:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Foe whoever "us" is:
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/10/religious-liberty-and-expression-under-attack-restoring-americas-first-freedoms

No, I know about that one. You said we had already had a discussion about assumptions, and I was asking which assumption I made at that previous time.

Using your context clues, you could have deduced that "us" would be whoever reads these posts.

That article exclusively cites examples in which the only religious freedom threatened is the "freedom" to infringe on the rights of others. It would appear my assumption in this case was totally accurate. I won't feign surprise.

[*bfine32*]

(09-04-2015, 11:28 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: That article exclusively cites examples in which the only religious freedom threatened is the "freedom" to infringe on the rights of others. It would appear my assumption in this case was totally accurate. I won't feign surprise.

Obviously this is your opinion, but there are many examples in that article that do not infringe on the rights of others.

 But given that a simple answer is the only one that will suffice (be understood) for "us", I will offer this:
There was a thread on these very boards about a Sheriff's Department that chose to put "In God we Trust" stickers on their vehicles. Many here and in the National Liberal Press said this should not be allowed.

Whose rights were infringed in the above example?

[GodHatesBengals]

(09-04-2015, 11:36 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Obviously this is your opinion, but there are many examples in that article that do not infringe on the rights of others.

 But given that a simple answer is the only one that will suffice (be understood) for "us", I will offer this:
There was a thread on these very boards about a Sheriff's Department that chose to put "In God we Trust" stickers on their vehicles. Many here and in the National Liberal Press said this should not be allowed.

Whose rights were infringed in the above example?

Before I answer your simple question with complete ease, may I raise the question of whether or not you know the difference between opinions and facts?

The right infringed there is the right of taxpayers to not have their money used on an endorsement of a belief that God exists. I certainly wouldn't want a half penny of my money paying for it. By the way, as a small government conservative, do you think little "In God We Trust" stickers are a good use of public funds?

[*bfine32*]

(09-04-2015, 11:48 PM)GodHatesBengals Wrote: Before I answer your simple question with complete ease, may I raise the question of whether or not you know the difference between opinions and facts?

The right infringed there is the right of taxpayers to not have their money used on an endorsement of a belief that God exists. I certainly wouldn't want a half penny of my money paying for it. By the way, as a small government conservative, do you think little "In God We Trust" stickers are a good use of public funds?

Once again with the assumptions. What makes you think I'm a small government person? I am a Federal Employee.

I don't want a half penny of my tax dollars paying for a great many things, but my rights are not being infringed because they are.

As to your opinion or facts question: I do know the difference. This is just one of the many cases from the article:

Quote:A student at a public elementary school wrote a short poem in her journal that included the line, “Love is the earth that God made.” Her teacher crossed out that line and said that discussion of God was not allowed in class. After the student’s father shared a letter from the ACLJ with the teacher, she explained that she had believed that any discussion of religion in a public school classroom was prohibited.

In your OPINION whose right did that elementary student infringe upon?