0
skymama

Isn't killing always killing?

Recommended Posts

Quote

Personal freedom to kill a baby? Good job, I hope everyone feels real special.



Dave,

I'm sorry about whatever personal thing happened to you in relation to abortion.

But I don't understand how your stated belief in freedom meshes with a strict pro-life attitude.

In the event of a rape, what is a pregnant woman to do? As the victim of a crime, is she to be further punished by being forced to have her rapist's baby? Even with our advanced medical care, childbirth is not 100% safe for the mother. Is it right for a raped woman to face the risk of dying while delivering a baby she doesn't want and didn't intend to have. The "you should have used birth control" arguements certainly don't apply.

Pro-choice does not equate to pro-abortion. The choice is the freedom to make what must be a heart-wrenching decision. I don't think it should be taken lightly, but I think most of the women who get abortions have already suffered more than enough. We don't need society berating them further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Abortion is a human invention. All other animals on this planet kill babies that they cannot support or do not want AFTER they are born. It is Natural however.

Pro choice. Nobody knows what sort of environment the baby will be born into better than the parent.

IMHO, an anti-abortionist should shut his mouth about his terrorist killing abilities/desires... Either that or go out and actually kill some terrorists. Stupid bumper-sticker-jerk probably doesn't know WHAT he stands for... just angry at the world.



My Karma ran over my Dogma!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

"does all human life have the same value"

combined with
- "who decides then when it's human"

combined with
- "who decides when society's or their own values are enough more important than the individual's to take their life."



This is the debate I'd rather focus on. It was just the "choose life" license plate vs. the "terrorist hunting permit" sticker that made me think of this discussion in the first place.
She is Da Man, and you better not mess with Da Man,
because she will lay some keepdown on you faster than, well, really fast. ~Billvon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well in that case mama,

I am one who beleive All life is equally valuable. Not just human life. That's right, the life of the fly buzzing around your head is just as valuable as YOUR life in my mind. That doesn't mean that it would be tough for me if, for some whacked reason, I was forced to make the decision between taking your life or the fly's.

Same thing goes for the mugger and the one being robbed. The 'Value' of their 'life' is the same. However, the 'value' of their lives is not what should be questioned.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the golden words here are "The lesser of two evils". The terrorist is actually commiting heinous acts and spreading evil. People don't like to use the words "good" and "evil" anymore because they have gotten so much harder to define ever since the Devil made us all beleive he doesn't exist. Taking out the terrorist may actually be "killing" but not an evil act as under the golden law of "the lesser of two evils" you would be preventing the further spread.



My Karma ran over my Dogma!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The lines are arbitrary; we decide them. We might say that it's God who said it, we might say it's obvious, we might just say that we support our president's decision no matter what (did I say that?:$).

Part of being in a society is agreeing to some sort of common definition. Most of us seem to think that humans are more worthy of protection than animals.

When it comes to choosing between humans, well, most of us think we're more valuable than someone else, if you really have to choose. And many parents would choose to preserve their kids' lives over their own.

When you're really really hungry or really really in danger, then values change. Of course, some people define "danger" kinda loosely. And we give others (soldiers, police) increased leeway in taking life.

Personally, I'd rather not be part of capital punishment, but in that case, I'm emphatically in favor of a very strong life without parole option. But I can live with capital punishment, and given that it's part of the law, there are cases where I could vote for it on a jury. Damn few, though.

Geez I sound pompous. sorry about that. Basically, each of us decides each day. That most of us agree most of the time is kinda lucky, and good for our continued survival.

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Killing is always killing.
Skymama's red neck neighbor - with too many bumper stickers - should make up his mind. I doubt if the braggard has the courage to go toe-to-toe with an Al Queda fanatic.

On the one hand, abortion is a question of chosing the lesser of two evils.

On the other hand, terrorists have already chosen to live by the sword, ergo, terrorists have also chosen to die by the sword. But let's leave killing terrorists to other people who have also chosen to live by the sword, ie. soldiers.

I could never respect military chaplains because they claimed to spread Jesus' teachings about forgiveness, etc, but on the other hand encouraged young men to go out and kill. I could never wrap my mind around that hypocrisy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote



Personally, I'd rather not be part of capital punishment, but in that case, I'm emphatically in favor of a very strong life without parole option. But I can live with capital punishment, and given that it's part of the law, there are cases where I could vote for it on a jury. Damn few, though.



IMHO, in Illinois all juries in "capital" cases should be given a presentation describing the cases where:

Prosecutors suppressed evidence favorable to the defense,
Police tortured suspects to gain confessions,
Prosecutors and police fabricated evidence,
Jailhouse informers were given reduced sentences in exchange for their testimony,
"Eyewitnesses" were coached by prosecutors,
Witnesses were told who to select at line-ups,
etc.

Maybe then we'd stop putting innocent people on Death Row.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Back to the original debate, maybe it's a question of:

- "does all human life have the same value"

combined with
- "who decides then when it's human"

combined with
- "who decides when society's or their own values are enough more important than the individual's to take their life."

Good question, and a toughie. Particularly part 3. Am I inherently more valuable than a mugger who's likely to kill me? To myself, I am.


killing is always killing...but..

lets make it larger.. " life feeds on life" of all types..human life isnt inherently more sacred or special than any other. the existance of one still ends to the betterment of another. same species or not.

the value of life is entirely determined by the culture, the individual and the circumstance. just because life looks like you doenst make it more valuable than life that does not..every culture, every individual must decide where those lines are drawn. Humanity draws them around itself to the detriment of all other...

is continually sad because his children will never see a tiger in the wild..to me all those tigers i will never see are more important than the 10,000 villagers who displace it. perspective is everything.
____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


IMHO, in Illinois all juries in "capital" cases should be given a presentation describing the cases where:

...
Jailhouse informers were given reduced sentences in exchange for their testimony,
...

Maybe then we'd stop putting innocent people on Death Row.



All the the cases you described could lend themselves to putting innocent people on Death Row but I don't see how one criminal ratting out another for a bargain sentence would. Certainly, when a jailed criminal testifies, their testimony is taken with a grain of salt and it is ALWAYS made aware if there was some sort of agreement to reduce scentence. Also, let's not assume that the law enforcement system is eager to reduce scentences of confirmed guilty prisoners. Thus, when this sort of deal is made, it is made with good cause.

As far as a jailed criminals testimony puttin an innocent on death row? What would a criminal already IN jail know about an innocent? How could one possibly pin the rap on someone they obviously would have to contact to? Nobody is going to the chair based on criminal testimony alone.



My Karma ran over my Dogma!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
To continue on the tangent...there is absolutely zero justification or rationale for the death penalty over life in prison other than revenge.

It has been proven numerous times that:
- The death penalty is not a detterent
- It is cheaper to house someone for life in prison than go through a capital trial
- Innocent people ARE executed
- We are the only modern/western nation to have the death penalty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

To continue on the tangent...there is absolutely zero justification or rationale for the death penalty over life in prison other than revenge.

It has been proven numerous times that:
- The death penalty is not a detterent
- It is cheaper to house someone for life in prison than go through a capital trial
- Innocent people ARE executed
- We are the only modern/western nation to have the death penalty.



i agree except the word is punishment, not revenge. and prevention as that individual will never take another life. with imprisonment the possibility exists that they may..
____________________________________
Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


- The death penalty is not a detterent



I tend to flip-flop a little in my stance regarding capital punishment. One thing is for sure though, I'd like to see people stop using the above statement as an anti death penalty argument. Life in prison is no detterent either. The death penalty is not to stop futur murders but to deal with the murderer that you caught! Get rid of that slime, not make an example for other slime!



My Karma ran over my Dogma!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok Ill add my 2 cents to this.

I've found most Religious (Capital "R") people to be highly hypocritical. Anything can be justified in the name of their 'TRUE' belief.

The anti-abortionists are identical to the Islamist extremists in this respect.
Those who do not believe as I shall be forced to believe as I...

I can never respect anyone that can not respect teh ability of a rational adult human to choose their own path.

E

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>The anti-abortionists are identical to the Islamist extremists in this respect.

Some are; the army of god, for example. Some are just people who strongly believe in the sanctity of life, and find killing a doctor just as abhorrent as killing a fetus. In fact, they seem to be in the majority of anti-abortionists (fortunately.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
> Isn't killing always killing,
> no matter what the circumstances are?

I don't know, but I always feel uneasy when
pulling something out of context and then
forming a judgement about it.

Someone cuts someone with a knife.
Is it a surgeon helping someone?
Is it someone defending themselves against attack?
Is it a torturer inflicting pain?

Killing someone seems like a major act
in any circumstance, but without knowing
the context it seems hard to form the next
layer of opinion.

----

Abortion is even harder to get a grip on,
and I don't think there will ever be any
agreement on the question of when a life
begins, or even on what the question means.

I do think it's the women's question to
answer though, not some judge, not some
senator, not even the father.

If all these anti abortion people really
wanted to do something about abortion
we would have really good sex education
and some more realistic views on human
sexuality, and people wouldn't be getting
pregnant unless they wanted to.

They are going after symptoms instead of
root causes.

Skr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Isn't killing always killing, no matter what the circumstances are?



I would have to say no. Society has decided that some people get punished for killing and some don't. A few examples of the types of killing that society accepts: a soldier in war acting within the guidelines of the Geneva Convention, a person in self defense, a police officer protecting the lives of others. This seems to indicate that not all forms of killing are the same. If there is a strong enough reason to kill somebody then society allows it. Is someone's personal comfort cause enough to kill another person (who has done nothing wrong)? Society allows that now.


"Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain and most fools do." Ben Franklin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Killing is always killing. However killing is not always murder, a major difference.

Abortion is murder, example; if a pregnant woman is beat and looses the baby it's murder. Now if she kills it in the womb its abortion (not murder?) makes no sense.

Defending our country from those that would do us harm is justifiable homicide.

The legal definition of homicide. The killing of a human being by a human being.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, here is my opinion. I've become pretty open minded about the subject. I was hard core pro-life, but realized that I was just to closed minded to have inteligently made that decisiion.

I think that if women want the choice to abort their baby, the choice should be made before a point in the pregnancy. Unless a birth becomes dangerous to the mother, the choice should be taken away after say 3 months. That should allow for the women who sleep with 10 different guys a week and don't pay a damn attention to their body, enough time to figure out they are pregnent. After that, too bad, welcome to the real world that doesn't include a wardrobe from Abercrombie. Also, 3 months is plenty of time for a rape victim to figure it out.

Quote

I had two girlfriends who have had abortions, and I can assure you they were really miserable about it. But at that point it was just not possible for them to have a kid.



Would it have endangered their own life to give birth or did they just not want to live with that resposability? The latter of the two is more likely and in that case it WAS possible for them to have a kid.

Death penalty is a bad thing under the current circumstances. As pointed out, innocent people are killed. There need to be guidelines that only inact the death penalty in the most obvious of guilty cases. There is a difference between beyond reasonable doubt and BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. In the United States of America we are born with the right for life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. When you kill someone, or commit treason against our country, you loose all three of those. Should have thought about that before you commited the crime.

Terrorists, I have no sympathy what so ever for. There shouldn't even have to be an explanation for this viewpoint. If you sympathize for them, fine, you live in America and that is your right but to many people forget all to quickly the innocent who have suffered. Thats right, people just like you that believe the terrorists actions should not be punished, are killed just as easily as everyone else.

"Fighting for peace is wrong."? Fine, f*** it, let's just lay down and ignore the rest of the world. What have I been thinking, certainly the best way to obtain peace is to not defend ourselves. Then everyone in the world will get a big grin when they see the big daffodil growing up from the center of America, everone will hold hands, no one will starve, no one will die before age catches up to them, everyone will hold hands and worship at a common church right in the middle of Jerusalem. Damn I sure wish the government would figure this out. :S

Edited for language.
-So, how hard is the ground?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

There need to be guidelines that only inact the death penalty in the most obvious of guilty cases. There is a difference between beyond reasonable doubt and BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT.


I spent nearly two months sitting on a jury that was charged with deciding whether a man should live or die for his crimes. I can only speak for myself and the jury I was on, but I think that entire experience gave me a bit of insight into the death penalty that others may not have.

In the case we were hearing, the defendant had already been found guilty of first degree murder with special circumstances. This guy was a loser by anyone's standards; he'd spent most of his adult life in prison already and besides the murder that put him in front of us he had also nearly killed another prisoner while waiting for this trial.

We heard about the crime he was convicted of. He was only a few weeks out of prison when he and a friend had invaded someone's home, tied up and terrorized the residents (a woman and two children) and a male guest, ransacked the house and then shot and killed the man as he tried to get out of the house.

We heard about his attack on the other prisoner - an attack so brutal that the other prisoner arrived at the hospital with his throat cut from ear to ear and a "shank" (prison made knife) embedded so deep in his spine that the ER doc had to literally pry it out.

We heard about his repeated fights with and stabbings of other prisoners in the numerous prisons he'd been in around California.

We saw pictures of him smiling for the camera, covered in blood after stabbing another prisoner. We saw his "white power" tattoos and heard about him attacking a prison doctor who wouldn't authorize special shoes to help with his claimed back injury.

We all agreed that it was very likely that he would attack, stab and probably kill again if he was sentenced to life in prison. The majority of us honestly believed that he was truly an evil person.

We sentenced him to life in prison, solely because the DA hadn't proven to us - beyond not just a reasonable doubt but beyond any doubt - that he was the one who'd pulled the trigger in the incident that put him before us. None of us were 100% happy with our decision, but all of us agreed that we couldn't live with ourselves if we sentenced this man to death.

I know that juries have made mistakes in the past. I know that innocent people have been sentenced to death, and it's likely that one or two innocent people have actually been put to death. But after being a part of a jury that spared the life of a man who likely deserved to die, I honestly believe that most juries do their very best to make the right decision when they are faced with that choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The question you should be asking yourself is this. If someone was pointing a gun at you and you at him or her, if you were given the chance to shoot first would you???? Think about this long and hard and then think about all those people at the World Trade center that never had that choice. FYI the plane that hit tower one's pilot was imprisoned by Israel in 96, and we the US let him out knowing this might happen go figure!!!! So essentially we did what you might be afraid to do, given the choice above. So we paid for it. Oh and thanks Mr Clinton for letting him go !!!! What a waste.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And if he was kept in prison, wouldn't that have also kept him (but not someone else, btw) from piloting that plane?

If someone was pointing a gun at you, you are in eminent danger of losing your life. If someone is behind bars with no chance for parole, you're not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0