The Political Discussion Thread

[lordofseas]

because it can be argued that if you choose a life of very heinous crime you forfeit these rights

Because the death penalty only kills criminals. Tell that to the innocent dead.

[SoulReaver]

Secondly, if your life belongs to yourself, then why is the State allowed to take your life away from you?

because capitalism & state-worship ain't mutually exclusive

[Galileo_Galilee]

Secondly, if your life belongs to yourself, then why is the State allowed to take your life away from you?

Let's try it like this:

I have no problems removing a persons' life when they do something like this:

(WARNING! This site has some very disturbing images and is NOT SAFE FOR WORK)

http://martynemko.blogspot.com/2010_04_01_archive.html

Why should somebody who does something like this have a right to live?

Tell me that?

What about their victims' right to not be killed? Where was it?

Everybody has a right to a defense of course, but saying that a person who does something monstrous like this deserves to live is absolutely absurd.

No, anybody who does soemthing like that is a sheer monster and should be removed from society in order to protect poor victims like that girl.

[Galileo_Galilee]

Grrr... double post, dagnabit.

[Goose]

Well, I believe everyone has an inalienable right to life. I know some people are in favour of the death penalty, and that's fine, but I'm not.

[Galileo_Galilee]

And that's fine. I just don't understand why guys who do monstrous things like that should be allowed to live. That's the only thing stopping them from doing it again.

[mad_gater]

The death penalty may be permissible when it is the only possible way to defend human lives. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains:

Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity with the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm—without definitively taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself—the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity are very rare, if not practically nonexistent. (CCC 2267)

[Goose]

And that's fine. I just don't understand why guys who do monstrous things like that should be allowed to live. That's the only thing stopping them from doing it again.

They should be allowed to live because the right to life is an inalienable right of every single person. The fact that they deprived someone else of that right does not mean they deprive themselves of that right. However, they should of course be punished, and locked away for a long, long time.

[Galileo_Galilee]

because the right to life is an inalienable right

There is no such thing as a right to life. That phrase is about self govern ship.

[lordofseas]

The death penalty may be permissible when it is the only possible way to defend human lives. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains:

Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity with the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm—without definitively taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself—the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity are very rare, if not practically nonexistent. (CCC 2267)

Democracy 101: The Catechism of ANY Church is not law.

In any case, has the concept of "Life Imprisonment without the possibility of parole" ever occurred to anyone?

[mad_gater]

Democracy 101: The Catechism of ANY Church is not law.

In any case, has the concept of "Life Imprisonment without the possibility of parole" ever occurred to anyone?

which is why we're a republic and not a democracy...there's a difference between the 2

[Galileo_Galilee]

"Life Imprisonment without the possibility of parole" ever occurred to anyone

Costs too much.

In 2006 Americans were paying $60 billion a year to house 2.2 million people.

From mg's quote.

[Goose]

There is no such thing as a right to life. That phrase is about self govern ship.

Maybe in the US Constitution, but...

Article 2.1 of the European Convention of Human Rights:

Everyone's right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which this penalty is provided by law.

(Note: the death penalty was restricted to times of war by Protocol 6 of the Treaty, and was later completely abolished by Protocol 13).

[lordofseas]

Costs too much.

In 2006 Americans were paying $60 billion a year to house 2.2 million people.

From mg's quote.

And is that how many people are on Death Row? 2.2 million people? As of 2010, there were 3,242 on death row. That number has probably changed due to executions and convictions.

[Rudy Pena]

In the state of California it costs about $100,000 a year to house 1 inmate per year. Well this was how much it was in about 06-07 timeframe, could be a bit more. And California houses the highest inmates in the US.