9th vs. 10th Amendment

The forum for general posting. Come join the madness. :)
Message
Author
User avatar
triviawayne
Posts: 678
Joined: Fri Jul 10, 2015 6:38 am

Re: 9th vs. 10th Amendment

#51 Post by triviawayne » Tue Jun 28, 2022 5:58 pm

Bob78164 wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 2:32 pm
triviawayne wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 2:20 pm
3. If you consider an unborn person a life and abortion murder, than using the death penalty to kill an adult is also murder...one that you seem to be OK with. It is the very definition of a conflict

4. This thread is about abortion and when life begins, not about those in already alive. And before you attempt to muddy the water further with your nonsense, #3 is not the same as it is regarding your argument that murder = bad = not ok vs. ok.
I think BiT's position is that fetuses are INNOCENT human life whereas murderers, due to their own actions, have brought upon themselves punishment that may include the death penalty.

For my own part, my opposition to the death penalty stems from my recognition that we simply can't get that decision right reliably enough. The Innocence Project has demonstrated that to my satisfaction. If there were some way to know with absolute certainty that people suffering the death penalty really did commit the crimes for which they were convicted, I'd have much less trouble with it (although it still would concern me greatly that the punishment of similarly situated defendants differs greatly depending on the color of their skin). But I can't think of a workable legal regime in which the death penalty is limited to cases where we're really, really sure the defendant is guilty, so I would choose to err on the side of making sure that our mistakes are correctable.

It's a misstatement to say that the abortion debate is about when "life" begins. Fetuses are indisputably alive (although incapable of supporting their own existence independently), so that's an argument you can't win. Sperm cells and unfertilized egg cells are also alive. The issue isn't whether a fetus is alive. It's whether a fetus is entitled to the rights of a human being. And that is fundamentally a moral question that is not susceptible to scientific analysis. It's a straight-up value judgment, and I don't see room for compromise. --Bob
Yet he should at the very least know that not everyone on death row is guilty, meaning he knows there are innocent lives being taken…and is still OK with that.

User avatar
Beebs52
Queen of Wack
Posts: 14892
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:38 am
Location: Location.Location.Location

Re: 9th vs. 10th Amendment

#52 Post by Beebs52 » Tue Jun 28, 2022 6:50 pm

triviawayne wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 5:58 pm
Bob78164 wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 2:32 pm
triviawayne wrote:
Tue Jun 28, 2022 2:20 pm
3. If you consider an unborn person a life and abortion murder, than using the death penalty to kill an adult is also murder...one that you seem to be OK with. It is the very definition of a conflict

4. This thread is about abortion and when life begins, not about those in already alive. And before you attempt to muddy the water further with your nonsense, #3 is not the same as it is regarding your argument that murder = bad = not ok vs. ok.
I think BiT's position is that fetuses are INNOCENT human life whereas murderers, due to their own actions, have brought upon themselves punishment that may include the death penalty.

For my own part, my opposition to the death penalty stems from my recognition that we simply can't get that decision right reliably enough. The Innocence Project has demonstrated that to my satisfaction. If there were some way to know with absolute certainty that people suffering the death penalty really did commit the crimes for which they were convicted, I'd have much less trouble with it (although it still would concern me greatly that the punishment of similarly situated defendants differs greatly depending on the color of their skin). But I can't think of a workable legal regime in which the death penalty is limited to cases where we're really, really sure the defendant is guilty, so I would choose to err on the side of making sure that our mistakes are correctable.

It's a misstatement to say that the abortion debate is about when "life" begins. Fetuses are indisputably alive (although incapable of supporting their own existence independently), so that's an argument you can't win. Sperm cells and unfertilized egg cells are also alive. The issue isn't whether a fetus is alive. It's whether a fetus is entitled to the rights of a human being. And that is fundamentally a moral question that is not susceptible to scientific analysis. It's a straight-up value judgment, and I don't see room for compromise. --Bob
Yet he should at the very least know that not everyone on death row is guilty, meaning he knows there are innocent lives being taken…and is still OK with that.
They at least got a trial by their peers.
Well, then

Post Reply