Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2010 11:04:54 GMT -5
justice should always be tempered with mercy Why? Justice and mercy are diametrically opposed. Justice demands equal protection for every citizen. You can't pick and choose different punishments for different people, each of whom have committed the exact same crime.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2010 11:08:53 GMT -5
the death sentence is not a punishment sentence but a final sentence and to get the populace involved including children in the death either by stoning or crane hanging is barbaric to say the least It isn't more barbaric than lethal injection performed in a secret bunker. Getting the children involved in an execution demonstrates social cohesion and resolve. An execution is the ultimate demonstration of who's really in charge. That's important in a place, like Los Angeles, where respect for the law is lacking.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2010 11:15:56 GMT -5
the method is always relevent ...we have humane killings of animals Animals aren't humans. They're destroyed, not executed. Big difference. a bullit to the brain as aposed to hours of stoning I know which i would choose Retribution is about denying choice, not giving it. An execution isn't for the benefit of the condemned. It's for the benefit of the condemning.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2010 11:23:21 GMT -5
as fret says just because blair has so far got away with it..doesnt make it legal..and we will certainly do our best to get him to trial..doubt we will suceed but we are certainly trying...he lied to us..to his cabinet to parliament ..and sent our sons to war unequipt and with hands tied behind their back..the man is guilty of murder apart from being a greedy lying hyporcrite Is ANY of that per se illegal under British law. they were the persians.. a very bright inventive civilisation that turned muslim after they were invaded by muslims the elections they had were fixed by the religious mob that rule and not freely elected They're not bright and inventive now. The religious mob that currently rules does so by the consent of the ruled. to say that the iranians will have to EARN democracy is about one of the most ignorent remarks i have heard in a long time It's not ignorant at all. If Iranians truly want democracy, they have to jettison Islam as the dominant influence in politics. They can have a secular democracy or a sectarian theocracy. It's one or the other. There is no such thing as a democratic theocracy. iran is not people by a mass of ignorent peasant..its people by the usual mixture found in any civilised country highly intelligent and well educated and the less intelligent and less well educated The intelligent and well-educated emigrate from Iran. A few stay, but they understand who's in charge. It isn't the educated and intelligent, and never will be, unless religion takes a back seat to secular governance.
|
|
|
Post by fretslider on Jul 13, 2010 16:40:01 GMT -5
the method is always relevent ...we have humane killings of animals Animals aren't humans. They're destroyed, not executed. Big difference. a bullit to the brain as aposed to hours of stoning I know which i would choose Retribution is about denying choice, not giving it. An execution isn't for the benefit of the condemned. It's for the benefit of the condemning. Humans are animals. Execution is barbaric. I don't do god, but two wrongs don't make a right.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 13, 2010 20:28:52 GMT -5
Humans are animals. Execution is barbaric. I don't do god, but two wrongs don't make a right. What is right is often impossible. The species is destined for extinction, not utopia.
|
|
|
Post by beth on Jul 14, 2010 13:39:36 GMT -5
We do nothing all the time, Lynne. We pick and choose where evil triumphs.
On the money and well said. Often, the "sins of omission" are just as destructive as the "sins of commission" ... and occasionally, more so.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jul 15, 2010 1:47:52 GMT -5
well your simply stating the obvious in saying they need to get islam out... ...but you said to the effect if they wanted democracy they would have to work/fight for it well excatly what DO YOU think they are doing?? they are fighting..working for the freedom the choose their gov a gov elected by fraud and manipulation they are fighting against the full resources of the state...a state which will beat you sensless for simply holding hands a state which will rape with broken bottles a state which will bring in a trumped up charge and then bring the relatives of a prisoner and torture them infront of the said prisoner..just how many can stand to watch a 5yr old being gang raped...or their mother have her breasts cut off...or their fathers raped with a hot iron and those are some of the ""nicer"" persuasions and you say glibly they have to ""want democracy"" phhfftt how very easy to insult and belittle what these people are up against...very arogant and how easy to sit at a computer and spout they are still a bright and inventive people...their standards of education is very[some subjects are not allowed]but they are fighting unbelievable odds....and paying a very high price but one day they will win through...mean while they have to fight daily...they have to have bravery and guts daily untill they finally throw off the dreadful yoke of islam and its barbaric exponants
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jul 15, 2010 1:52:10 GMT -5
retribution is nothing more than ..pay back nothing to do with denying choice and execution is not for the benefit of the condeming..its to get rid of the offender so he/she cannot offend again....
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jul 15, 2010 2:01:19 GMT -5
justice should always be tempered with mercy Why? Justice and mercy are diametrically opposed. Justice demands equal protection for every citizen. You can't pick and choose different punishments for different people, each of whom have committed the exact same crime. justice and mercy are not in anyway aposed... so some one is to be executed...the civilised way is to just execute as cleanly and swiftly as is possible...only a sadist whishes to prolong and enjoy the procedure....thus temper justice with mercy there was a case a few weeks ago of a 7yr old hung for treason how much more merciful if he had to be executed to have quickly shot him rather than prolong his suffering by hanging justice must always be tempered by mercy in a society which endeavers to be half way civilised
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jul 15, 2010 2:15:49 GMT -5
as fret says just because blair has so far got away with it..doesnt make it legal..and we will certainly do our best to get him to trial..doubt we will suceed but we are certainly trying...he lied to us..to his cabinet to parliament ..and sent our sons to war unequipt and with hands tied behind their back..the man is guilty of murder apart from being a greedy lying hyporcrite Is ANY of that per se illegal under British law. . YES..for any minister to lie let alone the prime minister to lie and take to war on a false premise is is punishable...it may not be writen as against the law..but certainly would not be aceptable ..would be a case for the courts and knowingly sending troops to war without the right equipment thus causing avoidable deaths and casualties would also .. while not writen in law be a case to answer some things do not have to be on the statute book..because before blair it was inconcievable that any prime minister would act in such a manner...inconcievable that any prime minister would act against the national interests of our people to serve the interests of a foriegn power he isnt known as the poodle for nothing you know we simply have to gather the proof..and already he is being recalled to face the chilcot enquirey again..the man is a consumate actor and twister of words.. plus of course how a man in debt can suddenly be worth 20 million in two years...there are cases to be answered by anthony charles linton blair but one day the truth will out..the treasonous..treacherous greedy piece of scum
|
|
|
Post by Wonder Woman on Jul 15, 2010 7:55:22 GMT -5
To touch on a couple points, mouse…
Of course execution is for the benefit of the condemning. You say so yourself when you say “its to get rid of the offender so he/she cannot offend again”. That certainly benefits the condemning society. I dispute, however, that such a benefit exists, particularly with offenders who were stopped by imprisonment years before the execution. But that’s a separate issue.
I have 7 year old grandchildren and IMO, a state/country that kills 7 year olds (under any guise) is about as barbaric as they come. Who cares about how merciful such a killing is, when it’s impossible to see any sense of justice inside that killing? A society that attempts to justify the execution of young children is not the least bit merciful, nor civilized.
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jul 15, 2010 8:58:25 GMT -5
it wasnt a state but members of the wanna be islamic state of afghanistan to be exact...leaving the emotion out of it.... if the rules are a child can be executed....then the quickest is the most merciful..
|
|
|
Post by mouse on Jul 15, 2010 9:00:12 GMT -5
To touch on a couple points, mouse… Of course execution is for the benefit of the condemning. You say so yourself when you say “its to get rid of the offender so he/she cannot offend again”. . ahh a misunderstanding of words...sorry i took the condeming to be the judicial system rather than the population as a whole
|
|
|
Post by Wonder Woman on Jul 15, 2010 9:34:33 GMT -5
it wasnt a state but members of the wanna be islamic state of afghanistan to be exact...leaving the emotion out of it.... if the rules are a child can be executed....then the quickest is the most merciful.. Forgive me if I don't care whether such a society kills them mercifully. I'd consider it wrong and barbaric all the same whether they inject a death drug or tear them limb from limb. The former may be more palatable because it won't put them in pain, but IMO it doesn't make that society any more civilized. In fact, perhaps less so, because it gives people the opportunity to view such 'civilizations' as non-barbaric. Other societies tend to turn a blind eye to injustice when that injustice is tempered with mercy.
|
|