RANT: Pro life and anti-death penalty


Alabama man released after decades on death row: Sign of a flawed system? (+video)
As the number of death-row exonerees continues to grow, fundamental questions are being raised about potential flaws in the system.
By Cristina Maza, Staff writer APRIL 3, 2015

*** begin quote ***

Hinton is the third death-row inmate freed in the United States in less than a month. Since 1973, 151 people besides Hinton have been released from death row. And as the number of exonerees continues to grow, fundamental questions are being raised about potential flaws in the system.

“The fact that there’s innocent people in prison or death row has transformed people’s understanding of the death penalty,” University of North Carolina political scientist Frank Baumgartner, author of “The Decline of the Death Penalty and the Discovery of Innocence,” told Monitor reporter Patrik Jonsson.

“Your opinion about the death penalty in the abstract is one thing, but meeting exonerees changes the death penalty from an abstract principle to a very practical issue of: Can the government do it right every single time?

*** end quote ***

And, we don’t know exactly the extent of the “error rate”.

Now isn’t the saying better that 100 guilty go free than 1 innocent goes to jail?

No erasers on the “pencils” of the death penalty!

Given that a trial costs 4 times the cost of life in prison (read that somewhere; good enough for a swag!) seems like we should just eliminate it for the most part. (Maybe it’s retained for those felons convicted of killing a correction officer?)

Sorry, but being pro-life means being anti-death penalty.

# – # – # – # – # 

RANT: Death Penalty is cruel, unusual, immoral, ineffective, and inefficient

Hasan Sentenced to Death in Fort Hood Shooting
A jury of U.S. Army officers sentenced Nidal Hasan to death for a mass shooting at Fort Hood in 2009 that ranks among the most worst soldier-on-soldier killings in the history of the nation’s military.

The sentence brings to a close a court martial in which the 42-year-old Army major offered essentially no defense to the Nov. 5, 2009, attack, in which 13 people were killed and 31 others injured. Maj. Hasan was convicted Friday of multiple counts of premeditated murder and attempted murder in connection with the shooting.

*** *** ***

Sorry but the State NEVER has the right to put anyone to death.

(I can understand the death penalty for someone who is too dangerous to incarcerate. Think Devil’s Island somewhere.)

Strategically, it’s something that can never be undone.

Tactically, it’s just not pro-life.

Plus, as an adder, isn’t this just what he wants?

Sorry, but I disagree.


INSPIRATIONAL: Views — memes and paradigms


“The man who views the world at fifty the same as he did at twenty has wasted thirty years of his life.”

– Muhammad Ali

# – # – # – # – #   

When I think of myself thirty years ago, my views today are different — some the same; some vastly different.

I’ve always been pro-life, but that has matured to be an anti-death penalty anti-war pro-choice pro-lifer. (The Gooferment has made this a polarizing issue. While I believe we have to preserve and value life, but not by force. It has to be done by moral persuasion. Winning the hearts and minds of our fellow humans. Certainly not by diktats and guns.)

I was pro-government; now I’m some sort of a little L libertarian that hates Gooferment!

Those are the two big memes that have morphed.

# – # – # – # – #   

POLITICAL: The debate is really NOT about “insurance”


A Woman Said
Posted on February 24, 2012

*** begin quote ***

What follows was part of a discussion on a well known “social media site”.  I copied it because I thought it said a lot about a great divide in our country, the one between two kinds of people, two generations, two different world views, two different cultures.  It was occasioned by the appearance of a cartoon showing the President of these Untied States wearing the clerical robes of a pope.  It was s satirical cartoon designed for strong reactions, and it got them.  People objected to the artist’s robing Obama as the Catholic Pontiff, commented on his support for abortion and his refusal to recognize the conscience rights of Catholics.  Someone, a young woman, wrote:

I find it disturbing, but I’m mostly offended by the commentary it represents. I don’t like Obama, but I don’t find him to be any more “tyrannical” or arrogant than any other President we’ve had. Calling him a Communist really just illuminates one’s complete misunderstanding of communism, and the equation of abortion with the Holocaust as well as the implication that requiring insurance to cover birth control is equal to abortion, just pisses me off.

*** and ***

As for the requirement that private employer’s insurance policies cover contraception – I could go on at length about the necessity of hormonal birth control for many women (such as myself) for entirely NON-birth control related reasons (if I don’t take it, I get terrible cysts due to my endometriosis – cysts that may very well prevent me from getting pregnant in the future when I choose to) – but also that I don’t think an employer, whether or not it’s the Catholic church, should be making the medical decisions of its employees. Removing one area of coverage allows others to be chipped away at – and employers and insurance companies may find it in their interest to lower premiums by not covering many routine [JR: My emphasis.] and/or necessary procedures they chose not to agree with for whatever reason.

*** end quote ***

Stepping out from the pro-choice / pro-life debate for a moment, I’d suggest that we all focus for a moment on the word “routine”. To me that means, “ordinary and predictable”. And, are we talking about “insurance”? Where a bunch of folks with the same random risk profile pool their premiums to be paid out when that fire, flood, or tornado hits. Here we have a lady arguing that we, as a society, should “insure” “oil changes for our cars.” Where is the random disaster in an “oil change”? Went to aa Jiffy Lube / Oil Well / or some such place last week. In and out for under $100 in ½ hour. Now envision if it was insured. Call 1-800-thrid world country, file a report, yada yada. No way that was going to cost under $100 and less than ½ hour. In principle, it’s the same. Forcing “insurance companies” into the position of paying for “routine” stuff is just wrong. So, if this is NOT about “insurance”, then it must be about “politics”, propaganda, and manipulation. So this circles us back to the pro-life / pro-choice debate. Because it’s OBVIOUSLY NOT about “insurance”. imho. ymmv.

# – # – # – # – #