Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gerard mangiardi who wrote (169366)	8/9/2001 12:36:35 PM
From: DMaA	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

I don't understand why people are perfectly content to let States decide for themselves on the death penalty but not on the abortion question. The death penalty is no less contentious an issue than abortion. Evidence of emotionalism over reason. Personal convenience over principle.

To: gerard mangiardi who wrote (169366)	8/9/2001 12:44:17 PM
From: PROLIFE	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

I believe it is God's right to take life but not governments Would you change your mind any if a man raped and burned and killed a daughter of yours?

To: gerard mangiardi who wrote (169366)	8/9/2001 2:06:22 PM
From: Gordon A. Langston	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

The Bible's reference is to murder, not killing. One might logically say that if the death penalty is wrong, then self-defense would be also. Our society says that it is acceptable to kill in defense of your own life or others. If the same assailant succeeds under a no death penalty scenario then he no longer would face the possibility of death. Sounds illogical to me. Is the death penalty a deterrent? Is is punishment? Is it murder by the state? Although it is often claimed that the death penalty is no deterrent, I disagree. The executed will never kill again. As further proof I only offer that fact that few, statiscally kill. Many are angered. Many are enraged. Many have thoughts along this line. To interview death row inmates and accept their claims that it was not deterrent is preposterous. Better to interview the rest of us and inquire if the threat of execution or any punishment is a deterrent to our behavior from the heinous act of murder to parking in a red zone. If you argue that the justice system is flawed and that is reason to suspend the death penalty the argument is not against the death penalty and it also indicates that any punishment should be withheld for other crimes for the same reason. This is a recipe for anarchy. Actions have consequences. It isn't necessary to view the death penalty as punishment when it can simply be the consequence of one's actions. It's part of the social contract. If the state executed someone without due process it would be murder, i.e. illegal. That is the prime definition of murder. that it is unlawful.

To: gerard mangiardi who wrote (169366)	8/9/2001 2:16:37 PM
From: haqihana	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

gm, Whether or not Texas has the death penalty, is not up to Bush. That law was passed by the state Legislature, and Senate, a long time ago, and they are the only ones that can change that according to the constitution of the State of Texas. He did not have the option of declaring a moratorium on executions, like the Governor of Illinois did. Also, there is not option of life in prison without parole, which is what I would prefer. Most, if not all, of the inmates executed during the time Bush was Governor, were sentenced before he was elected to the office, and had used up their one "stay" allowable in the constitution. No one seems to care if a mad dog is killed. Even though they are classified as human, some criminals are far worse than mad dogs, and because of new translation techniques, that commandment now reads; "You will not murder". This makes sense because, after God gave Moses the Ten Commandments in Exodus, He then gave him a list of people to be killed at the end of Exodus, and the beginning of Leviticus. He would not have asked Moses to break a commandment he had just given him.