U.S. Supreme Court stays execution amid lethal injection concerns

[w8tlftr]

First of again there is a difference between KILLING and MURDER its crucial that you understand that!!! And exactly what I said retribution and balance are better served by the muderer being put to death not by living out the rest of his life while he denied somebody else that same right. As for your first comments thats a matter of opinion I personally dont believe that it is but I was using it to make a point and it sounds like you grasped it

I'd have to validate this but I recall reading somewhere that the death (by execution) is recorded as a "homicide". IMO, your arguments between killing and murder is just splitting hairs. Taking the life of another is murder whether it be through war or even self-defense. Just my opinion though.

I am most certainly NOT suggesting that abortion is a better solution than adoption only pointing out the flaws in your logic of not having abortions because there are "plenty of people who want to adopt" its just simply not true. Abortion in my personal opinion is wrong and I would never want a girl that was impregnated by me to have one, but like I said I should have no power to tell someone else what to do with their body. 

The government already has the power to tell you what do (and not do) with your body. What makes state sponsored murder of innocent life different?

Why is it that you believe life begins at conception? Religious reasons?
Technically death is considered when brain activity stops so Logically Life would be when brain activity starts, right? Just an example of how complex this problem can be and how a black and white outlook will not fit as a solution to it.

My beliefs are probably "religion" based. I'm not a religious person though. IMO, religion is a dangerous tool used to control the masses. All I know is that I believe (or at least choose to) that life begins at conception. It is illogical for something that is dead to come to life.

[tonymctones]

I'd have to validate this but I recall reading somewhere that the death (by execution) is recorded as a "homicide". IMO, your arguments between killing and murder is just splitting hairs. Taking the life of another is murder whether it be through war or even self-defense. Just my opinion though.

Im not the one who split hairs the govenment says there is a difference between murder and killing, if that wasnt the case then somebody who killed in self defense would face the same consequences as somebody who murdered for no reason, right? you see there is a difference. Have you ever heard of justifiable homocide? its a justified killing such as self defense so even if an execution is kept in the homocide statistic it means nothing.
With that logic the person who killed in self defense should be in jail also, that is what you feel should happen?

The government already has the power to tell you what do (and not do) with your body. What makes state sponsored murder of innocent life different?

The government has the right to tell you what to do so far as your actions dont effect others tell me how somebody you dont know having an abortion is effecting you? In an earlier post you ran with my idea saying that why stop there well the same could be said here why not say who you can and cannot have sex with?
Second MURDER implies that the fetus is alive and as we went over earlier "life" begins at different times in different personal perspectives. So what makes your line of thinking the right one?

My beliefs are probably "religion" based. I'm not a religious person though. IMO, religion is a dangerous tool used to control the masses. All I know is that I believe (or at least choose to) that life begins at conception. It is illogical for something that is dead to come to life.

In continuing with the last paragraph what makes your beliefs the right one?
you basically have no bases for your belief, right? If it is religion based which is usually the case for most people who believe that life begins at conception. What do you think gives you the right to tell a non religious person what to do with their body?

[w8tlftr]

Im not the one who split hairs the govenment says there is a difference between murder and killing, if that wasnt the case then somebody who killed in self defense would face the same consequences as somebody who murdered for no reason, right? you see there is a difference. Have you ever heard of justifiable homocide? its a justified killing such as self defense so even if an execution is kept in the homocide statistic it means nothing.

I have no issues with justifiable homicide or even the killing of enemy combatants in a war.

The core of this discussion is whether or not the death sentence is the right thing to do. You're of the opinion it is. I'm of the opposite opinion. You're a voter just like me so we'll just agree to disagree since you have as much luck changing my mind as I do yours.

The government has the right to tell you what to do so far as your actions dont effect others tell me how somebody you dont know having an abortion is effecting you? In an earlier post you ran with my idea saying that why stop there well the same could be said here why not say who you can and cannot have sex with?
Second MURDER implies that the fetus is alive and as we went over earlier "life" begins at different times in different personal perspectives. So what makes your line of thinking the right one?

The effect of abortion is felt throughout society when we diminish the value of human life. It is my opinion that it's easier to assuage the guilt of the murder of an innocent if you truly believe it was never alive in the first place.

In continuing with the last paragraph what makes your beliefs the right one?
you basically have no bases for your belief, right? If it is religion based which is usually the case for most people who believe that life begins at conception. What do you think gives you the right to tell a non religious person what to do with their body?

I already told you. My belief is based on my spiritual values (since I've admitted I'm not "religious") and logic. Are you presenting the argument that the tissue that makes up the fetus is inanimate and suddenly comes to life? Sort of like a Frankenbaby? 

Additionally, if I am opposed to even the death of a criminal why would I not fight to save the life of an innocent?

[tonymctones]

I have no issues with justifiable homicide or even the killing of enemy combatants in a war.

WHAT? this directly contradict what you just said in an earlier post

Taking the life of another is murder whether it be through war or even self-defense. Just my opinion though.

This would mean that those who killed in self defense or those in the military should be treated the same as those who murder?

[/quote]

The effect of abortion is felt throughout society when we diminish the value of human life. It is my opinion that it's easier to assuage the guilt of the murder of an innocent if you truly believe it was never alive in the first place.

Please explain that one to me? Although I can see the line your logic follows I think it is an arbitrary arguement. I agree it is easier to assuage the guilt of a person who has an abortion just as it is easier to assuage the guilt of a person who kills some one as oppossed to someone who murders someone.

I already told you. My belief is based on my spiritual values (since I've admitted I'm not "religious") and logic. Are you presenting the argument that the tissue that makes up the fetus is inanimate and suddenly comes to life? Sort of like a Frankenbaby? 

Additionally, if I am opposed to even the death of a criminal why would I not fight to save the life of an innocent?

Have you ever heard of J.J. Thomson you should look her up and read her article on abortion. Im not suggesting that the tissue that makes up a fetus is inanimate but that doesnt mean that the tissue qualifies it as alive. Are you suggesting that the tissue qualifies life for the fetus?
If thats the case than stepping on an acorn is the same thing as cutting down a tree. If that is what you are suggesting then your logic doesnt get you very far.

I hope you are as staunchly against contraceptives like the "morning after pill" and other contraceptives that allow for abortions in your mind as they take place after conception.

As for the last comment thats exactly where I would expect you to stand which is actually rather quite refreshing as most people who oppose the death penalty support abortion which creates a double standard.

[w8tlftr]

WHAT? this directly contradict what you just said in an earlier post
This would mean that those who killed in self defense or those in the military should be treated the same as those who murder?

No it doesn't. I was saying that there is justifiable homicide and there state sponsored homicide (i.e. death sentence).

I don't have a problem with murdering someone if my life or the life of my friends or loved ones are in danger. Kill, murder, whatever. I'm taking someone's life away.

Please explain that one to me? Although I can see the line your logic follows I think it is an arbitrary arguement. I agree it is easier to assuage the guilt of a person who has an abortion just as it is easier to assuage the guilt of a person who kills some one as oppossed to someone who murders someone.

Have you ever heard of J.J. Thomson you should look her up and read her article on abortion. Im not suggesting that the tissue that makes up a fetus is inanimate but that doesnt mean that the tissue qualifies it as alive. Are you suggesting that the tissue qualifies life for the fetus?
If thats the case than stepping on an acorn is the same thing as cutting down a tree. If that is what you are suggesting then your logic doesnt get you very far.

I hope you are as staunchly against contraceptives like the "morning after pill" and other contraceptives that allow for abortions in your mind as they take place after conception.

As for the last comment thats exactly where I would expect you to stand which is actually rather quite refreshing as most people who oppose the death penalty support abortion which creates a double standard.

The "morning after pill" IMO is an abortion pill so yes, I'm against it.

I haven't not heard of J.J. Thomson - I'll try to look her up. I'm no authority on when life begins. I'm just stating what my beliefs are based on how I was raised and on reason and logic.