Welcome to the Republican Party

[baddog]

1 hour ago, LumRaiderFan said:

So to keep the baby from possibly having a hard time because the parents are pathetic losers, your solution is to murder it to save it from Republicans.

Get out of here with that stupid false argument, rational folks are tired of hearing it.

Also, the intelligent, adult woman who can make life or death decisions with HER body and contemplating murder, doesn't possess an ounce of intelligence about HER body and safe sex.

[UT alum]

7 hours ago, stevenash said:

so you don't want any "oversight" in this circumstance, correct? 

 

6 hours ago, Tigers2010 said:

He doesn't believe it is a person until it comes out the womb. Even though it has a heart beat, can hear, can feel pain, recognize it's mother, etc. 

 

3 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

So why do people get enhanced penalties when convicted for killing pregnant women?  

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

 

Basically, if a mom in NY decides to go get an abortion instead of heading to the hospital for delivery during her 38th week of pregnancy, it's okay because it's "her choice." If I get drunk and run over mom in her 16th week of pregnancy, I'm in extra big trouble because of the death of that unborn child.  Kinda paradoxical, is it not?  

Like I said earlier, Roe vs. Wade is the law of the land as far as I'm concerned, and any time spent discussing it is simply time wasted. 

I'm glad that we at least agree that tax-payer funded abortions shouldn't occur.  

Those are states rights. And I agree 100%, it’s the law of the land and I’ll bet even Kavanaugh won’t vote to overturn if given the chance. Congress and the entire national political debate could be a lot more productive if that fact was just accepted.

[LumRaiderFan]

1 hour ago, UT alum said:

 

 

Those are states rights. And I agree 100%, it’s the law of the land and I’ll bet even Kavanaugh won’t vote to overturn if given the chance. Congress and the entire national political debate could be a lot more productive if that fact was just accepted.

Silly conservatives...they simply won’t accept the fact that babies are being systematically murdered by the millions every year.

[LumRaiderFan]

1 hour ago, UT alum said:

 

 

Those are states rights. And I agree 100%, it’s the law of the land and I’ll bet even Kavanaugh won’t vote to overturn if given the chance. Congress and the entire national political debate could be a lot more productive if that fact was just accepted.

Not allowing blacks and women to vote used to be the law of the land...would you have been good with that?

[1989NDN]

1 hour ago, BS Wildcats said:

How about closing the legs?  It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know what causes a pregnancy.  It is pathetic that you think murder is ok, downright disgusting.  Murder is murder, stop trying to justify it!!

Does the murder is murder statement apply to capital punishment?

[LumRaiderFan]

25 minutes ago, 1989NDN said:

Does the murder is murder statement apply to capital punishment?

Thou shall not murder is translated as thou shall not take an “innocent“ life.

Doesn’t get more innocent than a child in the womb.

Having someone pay for their crime, even up to death, is justice, not murder.

 

[1989NDN]

16 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Not allowing blacks and women to vote used to be the law of the land...would you have been good with that?

So-called liberals encouraged changing those laws of the land.  Frederick Douglass, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, and others that challenged the establishment and status quo..  And, we had that thing...let's see, what was it...the War of Northern Aggression a/k/a the Civil War.  That brought about change.  The 14th and 15th Amendments, reconstruction, Jim Crow laws, Plessy v. Ferguson and Separate-But-Equal, the industrial revolution, Upton Sinclair's book, The Jungle, the rise of unions to prevent unfair labor practices, WWI, the 19th Amendment, the Great Depression, FDR, WWII, Thurgood Marshall challenging Separate-But-Equal with Brown v. Board of Education, the Warren Court, the Burger Court, the Rehnquist Court, etc.  Change happens.  Whether it is good or bad depends upon the lens with which you view the change.

[LumRaiderFan]

5 minutes ago, 1989NDN said:

So-called liberals encouraged changing those laws of the land.  Frederick Douglass, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, and others that challenged the establishment and status quo..  And, we had that thing...let's see, what was it...the War of Northern Aggression a/k/a the Civil War.  That brought about change.  The 14th and 15th Amendments, reconstruction, Jim Crow laws, Plessy v. Ferguson and Separate-But-Equal, the industrial revolution, Upton Sinclair's book, The Jungle, the rise of unions to prevent unfair labor practices, WWI, the 19th Amendment, the Great Depression, FDR, WWII, Thurgood Marshall challenging Separate-But-Equal with Brown v. Board of Education, the Warren Court, the Burger Court, the Rehnquist Court, etc.  Change happens.  Whether it is good or bad depends upon the lens with which you view the change.

What lens do you view killing an innocent child through and making it sound better by calling it a choice?

[1989NDN]

10 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Thou shall not murder is translated as thou shall not take an “innocent“ life.

Doesn’t get more innocent than a child in the womb.

Having someone pay for their crime, even up to death, is justice, not murder.

 

What about those on death row that don't belong there?  People on death row have been proven not guilty of their alleged crimes.  Some have luckily walked away after serving time on death row.  What about those that "get justice" when they don't belong there?  Is the taking of those innocent lives OK?  Do we just mark those off as the State getting it wrong.  Too bad, they should not have been there to begin with.  DNA or other evidence may prove the State wrongly took a life, but that happens.  It is justice; it is not state sanctioned killing?  I'm not advocating for abortion or capital punishment.  Ethically, I see the state allowing murder, be it a fetus, a baby, or an innocent person on death row, as wrong.  I'm a fan of your original statement.  Murder is murder.  Thou Shall Not Kill does not need any interpretation.  Apply it across the board and do so consistently.  Save babies, innocent people on death row, and even those that are guilty on death row.  Let's not have the State involved in any type of taking life.  And, I'm a centralist with a lean to the left.  See, not all liberals are evil.

Peace.

[1989NDN]

25 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

What lens do you view killing an innocent child through and making it sound better by calling it a choice?

The lens that I use...I see saving everyone.  I don't view abortion or capital punishment as acceptable.  There is no choice or interpretation.  Thou shall not kill = do not kill anyone.

Peacel.

[LumRaiderFan]

10 minutes ago, 1989NDN said:

The lens that I use...I see saving everyone.  I don't view abortion or capital punishment as acceptable.  There is no choice or interpretation.  Thou shall not kill = do not kill anyone.

Peacel.

You have it wrong...the original Hebrew is interpreted as thou shall not take an innocent life.

The Bible if full of bad folks being judged unto death.

If you are against capital punishment, fine.  I’m simply saying that’s not in agreement with the Bible.

[LumRaiderFan]

16 minutes ago, 1989NDN said:

What about those on death row that don't belong there?  People on death row have been proven not guilty of their alleged crimes.  Some have luckily walked away after serving time on death row.  What about those that "get justice" when they don't belong there?  Is the taking of those innocent lives OK?  Do we just mark those off as the State getting it wrong.  Too bad, they should not have been there to begin with.  DNA or other evidence may prove the State wrongly took a life, but that happens.  It is justice; it is not state sanctioned killing?  I'm not advocating for abortion or capital punishment.  Ethically, I see the state allowing murder, be it a fetus, a baby, or an innocent person on death row, as wrong.  I'm a fan of your original statement.  Murder is murder.  Thou Shall Not Kill does not need any interpretation.  Apply it across the board and do so consistently.  Save babies, innocent people on death row, and even those that are guilty on death row.  Let's not have the State involved in any type of taking life.  And, I'm a centralist with a lean to the left.  See, not all liberals are evil.

Peace.

I’m all about saving innocent folks on death row.

[BS Wildcats]

1 hour ago, 1989NDN said:

Does the murder is murder statement apply to capital punishment?

If the person does the crime that results in them receiving the death penalty, I absolutely have no problem with it.  

[CardinalBacker]

28 minutes ago, BS Wildcats said:

If the person does the crime that results in them receiving the death penalty, I absolutely have no problem with it.  

My views have changed over time. I had the chance to visit with a captain that had actually supervised executions here in Texas.  His accounts were spectacular, and also he had gone through an evolution to believing that capital punishment was wrong. It had an impact on me. 

I concede that I might feel differently if I was close to a victim, though. 

I’m not saying that people don’t deserve to be put down... just that actually putting them down is wrong. Kinda like smacking a woman... she might completely deserve it, but you just don’t. 

[BS Wildcats]

49 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

My views have changed over time. I had the chance to visit with a captain that had actually supervised executions here in Texas.  His accounts were spectacular, and also he had gone through an evolution to believing that capital punishment was wrong. It had an impact on me. 

I concede that I might feel differently if I was close to a victim, though. 

I’m not saying that people don’t deserve to be put down... just that actually putting them down is wrong. Kinda like smacking a woman... she might completely deserve it, but you just don’t. 

Is it not wrong that the person being put down, put a person down to start with?  I feel they deserve it.  I know everyone has their own opinions, that's just mine.

[CardinalBacker]

7 hours ago, BS Wildcats said:

Is it not wrong that the person being put down, put a person down to start with?  I feel they deserve it.  I know everyone has their own opinions, that's just mine.

How is the executioner any different than an abortionist? Is it because “the state” has determined that the convicted person deserves it? 

Its a stretch in my opinion. 

Besides that, it’s cheaper to house an inmate until their natural death than to execute them. 

 

[PhatMack19]

3 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

How is the executioner any different than an abortionist? Is it because “the state” has determined that the convicted person deserves it? 

Its a stretch in my opinion. 

Besides that, it’s cheaper to house an inmate until their natural death than to execute them. 

The baby never killed anyone 

 

Almost all of these people on Death Row deserve everything they get.  The only reason it cost so much is because all of the legal challenges when a majority of them are guilty without a shadow of a doubt.  The fight over the injection they are doing because it could cause pain and suffering is a joke.  Those killers didn’t think of the victims or their families pain and suffering, so why should I care if it takes them 5 extra minutes to die.  

 

Bullets are cheap.  Depending on the caliber they usually run anywhere from 25 cents to a dollar.  One shot would do the trick most times.  If I miss a little, the 2nd shot would definitely do it at a cost of $2 bucks max. 

[Hagar]

5 hours ago, PhatMack19 said:

The baby never killed anyone 

 

Almost all of these people on Death Row deserve everything they get.  The only reason it cost so much is because all of the legal challenges when a majority of them are guilty without a shadow of a doubt.  The fight over the injection they are doing because it could cause pain and suffering is a joke.  Those killers didn’t think of the victims or their families pain and suffering, so why should I care if it takes them 5 extra minutes to die.  

 

Bullets are cheap.  Depending on the caliber they usually run anywhere from 25 cents to a dollar.  One shot would do the trick most times.  If I miss a little, the 2nd shot would definitely do it at a cost of $2 bucks max. 

Yep, a double tap in the head, less than a quarter of a second.  Cheap & efficient.

[CardinalBacker]

6 hours ago, Hagar said:

Yep, a double tap in the head, less than a quarter of a second.  Cheap & efficient.

I mean... that sounds cool and all, but that would make you no better than the person you’re executing. 

I believe that you have the right to defend yourself up to an including killing somebody if that’s what it takes to save yourself. I just don’t think that ethically you (as a person) can carry out a death sentence and be any different than the convict.  

[CardinalBacker]

11 hours ago, PhatMack19 said:

The baby never killed anyone 

 

Almost all of these people on Death Row deserve everything they get.  The only reason it cost so much is because all of the legal challenges when a majority of them are guilty without a shadow of a doubt.  The fight over the injection they are doing because it could cause pain and suffering is a joke.  Those killers didn’t think of the victims or their families pain and suffering, so why should I care if it takes them 5 extra minutes to die.  

 

Bullets are cheap.  Depending on the caliber they usually run anywhere from 25 cents to a dollar.  One shot would do the trick most times.  If I miss a little, the 2nd shot would definitely do it at a cost of $2 bucks max. 

I didn’t ask the difference between the unborn and the murderer. I asked for the difference between the abortionist and the executions. 

Because honestly, they’re both just taking a life. One life is innocent and the other is the opposite... but a life is a life. 

[PhatMack19]

2 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

I didn’t ask the difference between the unborn and the murderer. I asked for the difference between the abortionist and the executions. 

Because honestly, they’re both just taking a life. One life is innocent and the other is the opposite... but a life is a life. 

So you’re saying our military is full of bad people?

[Hagar]

4 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

I mean... that sounds cool and all, but that would make you no better than the person you’re executing. 

I believe that you have the right to defend yourself up to an including killing somebody if that’s what it takes to save yourself. I just don’t think that ethically you (as a person) can carry out a death sentence and be any different than the convict.  

The person that commits a horrendous crime has forfeited his life.  Why should they they get 3 squares a day, free medical, and lay around licking their behinds?  And the main reason - in a state that doesn't have the death penalty, the criminal has a genuine License to Kill in prison.  He's free to kill other prisoners, guards, or the Warden if he gets the chance.

Now I know we don't agree, and that's okay.  The above is just how I see it.  I won't change your mind, nor you me.  

[CardinalBacker]

16 hours ago, PhatMack19 said:

So you’re saying our military is full of bad people?

No, I stated in a previous post that self defense is the only reason to kill. But you really can’t claim self defense when you’re injecting poison into the arm of a person that’s being restrained. 

Kinda like sticking a needle into a helpless fetus, huh?

Stop thinking about what the condemned man did to deserve it. That’s on him. The man flipping the switch, or injecting the poison, or slapping that horse on the butt will have to answer for his actions, too. And he’s not going to have a biblical principal to stand on. 

Like I said... my beliefs have evolved. I just dont think I’d want to stand in front of my Maker and have to explain to Him why me killing this guy is any different than this guy killing somebody else.