Discussion in 'Politics' started by MarcATL, Apr 3, 2011.
Isn't that THE definition of cognitive dissonance?
You silly fellow...one is innocent, the other guilty.
Is that too nuanced for you?
Do you understand the concept of punishment?
Interesting question though, which I think the innocence / guilt thing sidesteps a bit too neatly.
If the jury says someone is guilty, the law provides that they can be executed. The law also says that a woman can have an abortion. I guess as always it comes down to whether one agrees with a particular law, which generally comes back to a moralistic / religious standpoint.
and perhaps we should not leave out pro premptive invasions and war.
Indeed. It's all about the taking of life.
I'm opposed to the death penalty. Lock 'em up for ever... no problem. Kill 'em.. not so much.
1. The period during which abortion is legal is, I believe, related to the time the foetus is viable....
So, Bob, if science pushes back the time of viability, should the law, at some point elimate the right to abortion?
2.This may be as different direction from the OP, but the punishment of the guilty is an obligation of a just society.
It is of more than passing interest to me that the death penalty for murder is the only law repeated in all five of the books of the old testament.
The death penalty is a value, values are eternal, as opposed to customs or traditions, such as stoning for adultery.
I suggest you reconsider your comment PC. See: The Innocence Project - Know the Cases
Jury's don't always get it right, investigators and prosecutors don't always disclose potentially exculpatory evidence, and defense teams don't always offer the best defense.
Separate names with a comma.