Death Penalty vs Gay Marriage

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by Dante, Jan 12, 2010.

  1. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    Can one use the same arguments about the state's role, voter public opinion, and Constitutional guarantees concerning the death penalty as one has used concerning gay marriages?

    The principles involved in the arguments are similar.

    An amendment to the constitution vs voter opinion, public morality, and tradition, and the bible and..,

    ----

    The death penalty is barbaric and it is always cruel and unusual punishment...so should we get rid of it all together? The rights of the defendants trump public opinion, which is fickle.

    The Constitutional guarantee against cruel and unusual punishment...should it be ignored if a state has a referendum where the majority of voters (even if only 49% of eligible voters, vote) decide they want to keep the death penalty?
     
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2010
  2. JD_2B
    Offline

    JD_2B Little Vixen

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2009
    Messages:
    1,092
    Thanks Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Nunya, Wudjathink
    Ratings:
    +118
    I suppose someone could, but it would only be yet another appeal to emotion, which there is no legal standard for. =)
     
  3. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    Appeals to emotion can be heard in courts, but they carry little weight.

    But it can and probably should be argued that the death penalty can be viewed as cruel and unusual punishment in a civilized society. I do favor the death penalty at times, but that is an emotional response to specific crimes. I do not want mine or yours emotions dictating things.
     
  4. lawbuff
    Offline

    lawbuff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2009
    Messages:
    439
    Thanks Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +30
    The SC permits the death penalty under the 8th, so it is a state's decision. The SC has decided the same sex marriage issue, so it is up to a state then to decide if it violates thier own laws/constitution, since the SC upheld the ban on federal constitutional grounds.
     
  5. uscitizen
    Offline

    uscitizen Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    45,941
    Thanks Received:
    4,791
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    My Shack
    Ratings:
    +4,807
    So if I was convicted I would either be sentenced to death or to marry a man?

    I will have to ponder on that for a bit.
     
  6. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    I understand, but the SCOTUS can revisit these fundamental questions.

    The SCOTUS has NOT decided the issue in regards gay marriage rights.
     
  7. lawbuff
    Offline

    lawbuff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2009
    Messages:
    439
    Thanks Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +30
    They did in 1971, research Baker v. Nelson.
     
  8. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    The SCOTUS did not decide a thing. They put it off until later.

    You really do need to comprehend what you read:

     
  9. lawbuff
    Offline

    lawbuff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2009
    Messages:
    439
    Thanks Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Ratings:
    +30
    No, you need to comprehend what you read, try to find out what "dismissed for want of a substantial federal question", really means. If you do, you will find it is a "decision on the merits", a Summary decision to prevent inferior courts from coming to opposite conclusions.
     
  10. Dante
    Offline

    Dante On leave Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    Messages:
    52,463
    Thanks Received:
    3,324
    Trophy Points:
    1,825
    Location:
    On leave
    Ratings:
    +6,054
    And the merits then were what the arguments were that particular case.

    This case is substantially different. You have two ideologically opposed lawyers joining forces and arguing this.
    Two lawyers who are huge in the field of law.
     

Share This Page