Fair call.

I'm looking at it from a cash strapped, economical point of view.

What is odd is that society HAS put a $ value on human life and it kills "in it's name" all the time.

In which examples?

(January 4, 2013 at 10:00 am)The_Germans_are_coming Wrote: In which examples?

Time for bed here mate. But off the top of my head the example of society killing in it's name would, generally speaking, encompass every war we have had on this planet to date.

Would it not?

Yes, but there have to be definitions. For instance:

having sex with someone entoxicated who didnt say ''no'' loud enough isnt as bad as it is to beat someone down and rape the person violently. We have to make definitions.

(January 4, 2013 at 12:06 pm)TheCreator Wrote: Yes, but there have to be definitions. For instance:

having sex with someone entoxicated who didnt say ''no'' loud enough isnt as bad as it is to beat someone down and rape the person violently. We have to make definitions.

Or if your date passes out and you say loudly and clearly "if you do not consent to anal sex, please say so now". Seriously if you've ever tried to have sex with someone intoxicated you know how little fun that is .. even if its their idea and they're not passed out.

Not every rape or rapist is the same. Sure, death penalty for ruthless gangrape that leads to the death of the victim. No, not death penalty for a singular offender who goes too far/too long in the heat of the moment and there is little particular physical trauma.

Don't be black and white. Redskins are sexier anyway. Tiberlicious agrees, I'm sure.

Absolutely not...I vehemently oppose the death penalty for any reason. It's just a barbaric and outdated custom.

(January 4, 2013 at 11:20 pm)Polaris Wrote: Absolutely not...I vehemently oppose the death penalty for any reason. It's just a barbaric and outdated custom.

People do not tend to enjoy being wronged. They're even more likely to respond harshly to those who harm their loved ones. Depending on how utterly insane they are, and on how 'evil' they deem what was done... slayings might occur.

Certainly, it might be considered barbaric by prissy people in nice houses. But it's an age-old tradition, and it isn't fast-changing.

(January 3, 2013 at 10:13 am)Tiberius Wrote: I'll state it again in case you were confused: There is a difference between confining someone until they die naturally, and confining someone with the intention of killing them by unnatural means. The former is preferable and moral under the circumstances. The latter is reprehensible.

Putting someone in a box until they die is killing them. The rest of your post where you say "Well I don't support this aspect of prison" or "I think this should be done here" is rather irrelevant. I think we should deal with the world as how it is.

Also if someone rapes a girl, how exactly do they repay their debt to society by being in prison the rest of their life? They don't owe 'society' anything. They owe that girl something, and if she thought the best way to repay that debt was to die, I would say so be it.

(January 4, 2013 at 11:28 pm)Violet Lilly Blossom Wrote:

(January 4, 2013 at 11:20 pm)Polaris Wrote: Absolutely not...I vehemently oppose the death penalty for any reason. It's just a barbaric and outdated custom.

People do not tend to enjoy being wronged. They're even more likely to respond harshly to those who harm their loved ones. Depending on how utterly insane they are, and on how 'evil' they deem what was done... slayings might occur.

Certainly, it might be considered barbaric by prissy people in nice houses. But it's an age-old tradition, and it isn't fast-changing.

South Africa called you on that bullshit philosophy more than 20 years ago.