Death penalty in UK.

[RandyBlue]

Aborting a foetus is Legal and is a Private matter for the individuals concerned....

Yet your parents were only part-successful and still contribute to the orphanage. Lovely story.

 

[der-bomber]

Aborting a foetus is Legal and is a Private matter for the individuals concerned....

Yet your parents were only part-successful and still contribute to the orphanage. Lovely story.

Oh, look l have acquired an internet stalker......what a fucking prize wanker of the highest order this one is as well.....LMFAO

 

[yep]

The point I was making is that society allows the death of a human being ( its not going to be an animal or vegetable)at a certain time of their development when there is an alternative so why all this fuss about society putting to death murderers, rapists, people who commit genocide. No comparison really!!

 

[ElanJo]

The point I was making is that society allows the death of a human being ( its not going to be an animal or vegetable)at a certain time of their development when there is an alternative so why all this fuss about society putting to death murderers, rapists, people who commit genocide. No comparison really!!

Your argument is one about depriving a potential person of life. Condoms do that. So does havin a wank. Infact, havin a wank is mass genocide ;)

You cant really use that argument imo. Not until you can pin point when someone is actually alive, but by then you wont really need to argue since most people will be against aborting/murdering something alive anyway.

There is no comparison with the view that the death penalty is wrong because it will inevitably kill someone ALIVE who IS INNOCENT. People can keep bringing up scenarios where the death of those guilty can be seen as just, but you aren't really arguing with anyone but maybe a tiny select few. Most people who are against the death penalty are so because they don't want to see innocent people wrongly put to death.


Bah, this thread needs the death penalty :P . I'm out

 

[yep]

The point I was making is that society allows the death of a human being ( its not going to be an animal or vegetable)at a certain time of their development when there is an alternative so why all this fuss about society putting to death murderers, rapists, people who commit genocide. No comparison really!!

Your argument is one about depriving a potential person of life. Condoms do that. So does havin a wank. Infact, havin a wank is mass genocide ;)

You cant really use that argument imo. Not until you can pin point when someone is actually alive, but by then you wont really need to argue since most people will be against aborting/murdering something alive anyway.

There is no comparison with the view that the death penalty is wrong because it will inevitably kill someone ALIVE who IS INNOCENT. People can keep bringing up scenarios where the death of those guilty can be seen as just, but you aren't really arguing with anyone but maybe a tiny select few. Most people who are against the death penalty are so because they don't want to see innocent people wrongly put to death.


Bah, this thread needs the death penalty :P . I'm out

Do not let the facts get in the way of a good rant!!!I would have liked some facts on the last post. Wanking is about sperm.I was using human life at a certain point of its development when sperm has long met the egg!!! We are all human beings and human becomings- we do not stand still; the young become old.Premature babies are kept alive before 24 weeks.
If , in your argument, you are worried about the innocent, then you could argue against PRISON. We have cases of the innocent being in prison for decades before being found innocent. Are you not prepared to PROTECT society from evil people ?

Western law is based on, "Abuse does not mean disuse." (No pun intended!) We do not convict with 100% certainty but " beyond all reasonable doubt!" Society needs better protection from evil people than it does presently.If the death penalty is arguably not a deterrent from offending then so it would seem is prison nowadays! At least with the death penalty they do not re-offend!

 

[ElanJo]

The point I was making is that society allows the death of a human being ( its not going to be an animal or vegetable)at a certain time of their development when there is an alternative so why all this fuss about society putting to death murderers, rapists, people who commit genocide. No comparison really!!

Your argument is one about depriving a potential person of life. Condoms do that. So does havin a wank. Infact, havin a wank is mass genocide ;)

You cant really use that argument imo. Not until you can pin point when someone is actually alive, but by then you wont really need to argue since most people will be against aborting/murdering something alive anyway.

There is no comparison with the view that the death penalty is wrong because it will inevitably kill someone ALIVE who IS INNOCENT. People can keep bringing up scenarios where the death of those guilty can be seen as just, but you aren't really arguing with anyone but maybe a tiny select few. Most people who are against the death penalty are so because they don't want to see innocent people wrongly put to death.


Bah, this thread needs the death penalty :P . I'm out

Do not let the facts get in the way of a good rant!!!I would have liked some facts on the last post. Wanking is about sperm.I was using human life at a certain point of its development when sperm has long met the egg!!! We are all human beings and human becomings- we do not stand still; the young become old.Premature babies are kept alive before 24 weeks.
If , in your argument, you are worried about the innocent, then you could argue against PRISON. We have cases of the innocent being in prison for decades before being found innocent. Are you not prepared to PROTECT society from evil people ?

Western law is based on, "Abuse does not mean disuse." (No pun intended!) We do not convict with 100% certainty but " beyond all reasonable doubt!" Society needs better protection from evil people than it does presently.If the death penalty is arguably not a deterrent from offending then so it would seem is prison nowadays! At least with the death penalty they do not re-offend!

Yes, innocent people get sent to prison and we rely on merely "beyond a reasonable". This is precisely why the death penalty CANNOT be reintroduced! Atleast if they are sent to prison they can appeal and fight their cause. They cannot do so if they are dead. This is common sense, I'm baffled that I even have to state it.


As for sperm. The principle is the same. Each sperm is unique and would create a different person. You are only here because the sperm that created you was not wiped up off your dads stomach or swallowed by your mother (lol, that's not something I thought I'd ever write.... sorry :P) No-one, except nutters, deems wanking as mass murder because they aren't alive. I understand what you're saying but I just don't think the argument of potentiality is a useful one when it comes to abortion. I think aborting a bit of plant-like flesh is 'ok' (ie. something that doesn't have consciousness) It's when the growth becomes alive is when I would deem it an immoral action/murder.


With regards to making society safer than it is. This isn't dependent on a death penalty. Infact ending prohibition of drugs would make society a much much safer place than giving the state the ability to kill us. As would giving longer sentences for the most heinous actions, such as rape and murder.

 

[yep]

The point I was making is that society allows the death of a human being ( its not going to be an animal or vegetable)at a certain time of their development when there is an alternative so why all this fuss about society putting to death murderers, rapists, people who commit genocide. No comparison really!!

Your argument is one about depriving a potential person of life. Condoms do that. So does havin a wank. Infact, havin a wank is mass genocide ;)

You cant really use that argument imo. Not until you can pin point when someone is actually alive, but by then you wont really need to argue since most people will be against aborting/murdering something alive anyway.

There is no comparison with the view that the death penalty is wrong because it will inevitably kill someone ALIVE who IS INNOCENT. People can keep bringing up scenarios where the death of those guilty can be seen as just, but you aren't really arguing with anyone but maybe a tiny select few. Most people who are against the death penalty are so because they don't want to see innocent people wrongly put to death.


Bah, this thread needs the death penalty :P . I'm out

Do not let the facts get in the way of a good rant!!!I would have liked some facts on the last post. Wanking is about sperm.I was using human life at a certain point of its development when sperm has long met the egg!!! We are all human beings and human becomings- we do not stand still; the young become old.Premature babies are kept alive before 24 weeks.
If , in your argument, you are worried about the innocent, then you could argue against PRISON. We have cases of the innocent being in prison for decades before being found innocent. Are you not prepared to PROTECT society from evil people ?

Western law is based on, "Abuse does not mean disuse." (No pun intended!) We do not convict with 100% certainty but " beyond all reasonable doubt!" Society needs better protection from evil people than it does presently.If the death penalty is arguably not a deterrent from offending then so it would seem is prison nowadays! At least with the death penalty they do not re-offend!

Yes, innocent people get sent to prison and we rely on merely "beyond a reasonable". This is precisely why the death penalty CANNOT be reintroduced! Atleast if they are sent to prison they can appeal and fight their cause. They cannot do so if they are dead. This is common sense, I'm baffled that I even have to state it.


As for sperm. The principle is the same. Each sperm is unique and would create a different person. You are only here because the sperm that created you was not wiped up off your dads stomach or swallowed by your mother (lol, that's not something I thought I'd ever write.... sorry :P) No-one, except nutters, deems wanking as mass murder because they aren't alive. I understand what you're saying but I just don't think the argument of potentiality is a useful one when it comes to abortion. I think aborting a bit of plant-like flesh is 'ok' (ie. something that doesn't have consciousness) It's when the growth becomes alive is when I would deem it an immoral action/murder.


With regards to making society safer than it is. This isn't dependent on a death penalty. Infact ending prohibition of drugs would make society a much much safer place than giving the state the ability to kill us. As would giving longer sentences for the most heinous actions, such as rape and murder.

Its a case of the least of two evils. How many are killed raped etc when prisoners are released compared with the innocent who are executed. I repeat it is a case of which is the best thing for protecting society! We all have to make our decisions!

On a lighter note; I am sure the death penalty would be a great motivator for football teams and would help solve the problem of deadwood (no pun intended) hanging (no pun intended) around for 5 years!!!

 

[ElanJo]

Your argument is one about depriving a potential person of life. Condoms do that. So does havin a wank. Infact, havin a wank is mass genocide ;)

You cant really use that argument imo. Not until you can pin point when someone is actually alive, but by then you wont really need to argue since most people will be against aborting/murdering something alive anyway.

There is no comparison with the view that the death penalty is wrong because it will inevitably kill someone ALIVE who IS INNOCENT. People can keep bringing up scenarios where the death of those guilty can be seen as just, but you aren't really arguing with anyone but maybe a tiny select few. Most people who are against the death penalty are so because they don't want to see innocent people wrongly put to death.


Bah, this thread needs the death penalty :P . I'm out

Do not let the facts get in the way of a good rant!!!I would have liked some facts on the last post. Wanking is about sperm.I was using human life at a certain point of its development when sperm has long met the egg!!! We are all human beings and human becomings- we do not stand still; the young become old.Premature babies are kept alive before 24 weeks.
If , in your argument, you are worried about the innocent, then you could argue against PRISON. We have cases of the innocent being in prison for decades before being found innocent. Are you not prepared to PROTECT society from evil people ?

Western law is based on, "Abuse does not mean disuse." (No pun intended!) We do not convict with 100% certainty but " beyond all reasonable doubt!" Society needs better protection from evil people than it does presently.If the death penalty is arguably not a deterrent from offending then so it would seem is prison nowadays! At least with the death penalty they do not re-offend!

Yes, innocent people get sent to prison and we rely on merely "beyond a reasonable". This is precisely why the death penalty CANNOT be reintroduced! Atleast if they are sent to prison they can appeal and fight their cause. They cannot do so if they are dead. This is common sense, I'm baffled that I even have to state it.


As for sperm. The principle is the same. Each sperm is unique and would create a different person. You are only here because the sperm that created you was not wiped up off your dads stomach or swallowed by your mother (lol, that's not something I thought I'd ever write.... sorry :P) No-one, except nutters, deems wanking as mass murder because they aren't alive. I understand what you're saying but I just don't think the argument of potentiality is a useful one when it comes to abortion. I think aborting a bit of plant-like flesh is 'ok' (ie. something that doesn't have consciousness) It's when the growth becomes alive is when I would deem it an immoral action/murder.


With regards to making society safer than it is. This isn't dependent on a death penalty. Infact ending prohibition of drugs would make society a much much safer place than giving the state the ability to kill us. As would giving longer sentences for the most heinous actions, such as rape and murder.

Its a case of the least of two evils. How many are killed raped etc when prisoners are released compared with the innocent who are executed. I repeat it is a case of which is the best thing for protecting society! We all have to make our decisions!

On a lighter note; I am sure the death penalty would be a great motivator for football teams and would help solve the problem of deadwood (no pun intended) hanging (no pun intended) around for 5 years!!!

Retarded? Why release murderers? Why is death the be all and end all ffs? It really is nothing about protecting society (not releasing them would serve the same purpose! and not kill wrongly convicted innocent people), it's about revenge and you're willing to kill innocent people to get it. It's sickening and I won't be part of this discussion any longer.

I just thank Jesus, Horus, Zeus, Allah and Santa that you lot, who support this bullshit, will never get your way.

 

[yep]

I just thank Jesus, Horus, Zeus, Allah and Santa that you lot, who support this bullshit, will never get your way.

A Prophet is Not Without Honor Except in His Own Home Town and His Own House.

 

[yep]

Looks as though this has died a death. (yet "never say "Die"")

“The young die sometimes, but the old always die.” An old Breton proverb.