How Can One Be Simultaneously "Pro-Life" AND Pro-Death Penalty?

[driveby]

Isn't that THE definition of cognitive dissonance?

Please advise.

I may be wrong, but i don't think a fetus has ever committed a felony.


Now, how can one be simultaneously pro abortion and anti death penalty? ....

 

[Liability]

The funny part is, the pro life guys are pro war as well.

How funny is that.

Wow. You ran away for a while and came back even more simplistic.

Nobody is "pro war." That is a ridiculously simple-minded contention you made. Of course.

It IS possible to support a war, however, and still value innocent life, you bombastic simpleton. In fact, support of some wars is premised exactly on the desire to salvage innocent human life.

AutoZona and her idiocy strike again.

Sad.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I too believe the death penalty should be available.
But, I am very concerned about the possibility of gung-ho prosecutors that wrongly convict innocent people.

Prosecutors dont convict people. juries do.
Judges and defense attornies and, well, the law, are all there to make sure the defendant gets every benefit of the doubt frim that jury.

 

[rdean]

The GOP is simply making sure they have enough people to starve and for their "death panels", not to mention "cannon fodder" for future wars. It's what they do. All they are good at. If I'm wrong, please name something else they are good at. Economics, science (just kidding), diplomacy, anything.

 

[Immanuel]

I too believe the death penalty should be available.
But, I am very concerned about the possibility of gung-ho prosecutors that wrongly convict innocent people.

Prosecutors dont convict people. juries do.
Judges and defense attornies and, well, the law, are all there to make sure the defendant gets every benefit of the doubt frim that jury.

Yet, prosecutors can and do withhold evidence that allow innocent people to be convicted.

Would you consider it first or second degree murder for a prosecutor to withhold evidence that causes a person to be wrongly convicted, sentenced to death and eventually executed? I'm thinking second degree but under the right circumstances it could be first degree.

Immie

 

[M14 Shooter]

I too believe the death penalty should be available.
But, I am very concerned about the possibility of gung-ho prosecutors that wrongly convict innocent people.

Prosecutors dont convict people. juries do.
Judges and defense attornies and, well, the law, are all there to make sure the defendant gets every benefit of the doubt frim that jury.

Yet, prosecutors can and do withhold evidence that allow innocent people to be convicted.

There are numerous safeguards against this, not the least of which is the threat of disbarrment of the prosecutor.

Would you consider it first or second degree murder for a prosecutor to withhold evidence that causes a person to be wrongly convicted, sentenced to death and eventually executed?

Neither. Withheld evidence will never get that far.

 

[Immanuel]

Prosecutors dont convict people. juries do.
Judges and defense attornies and, well, the law, are all there to make sure the defendant gets every benefit of the doubt frim that jury.

Yet, prosecutors can and do withhold evidence that allow innocent people to be convicted.

There are numerous safeguards against this, not the least of which is the threat of disbarrment of the prosecutor.

Would you consider it first or second degree murder for a prosecutor to withhold evidence that causes a person to be wrongly convicted, sentenced to death and eventually executed?

Neither. Withheld evidence will never get that far.

I hope you are right, but I'm not positive that you are.

Let me ask you a hypothetical and first are you an attorney?

Here is the hypothetical, if withheld evidence did get that far, would you consider it murder on behalf of a prosecutor?

I have to say, I have lost a lot of faith in our politicians and our legal system. I do worry about these kinds of things, because in a minor way, I have been accused of a crime that I did not commit and had to prove my own innocence.

Immie

 

[M14 Shooter]

Yet, prosecutors can and do withhold evidence that allow innocent people to be convicted.

There are numerous safeguards against this, not the least of which is the threat of disbarrment of the prosecutor.

Would you consider it first or second degree murder for a prosecutor to withhold evidence that causes a person to be wrongly convicted, sentenced to death and eventually executed?

Neither. Withheld evidence will never get that far.

I hope you are right, but I'm not positive that you are.

Anything is possible, but the process, especially when the defense attorney is doing his job, is designed to reduce errors to as near zero as possib.e

Let me ask you a hypothetical and first are you an attorney?

Not at this moment.

Here is the hypothetical, if withheld evidence did get that far, would you consider it murder on behalf of a prosecutor?

Depends. Was it a deliberate act, intended to cause the death of the defendant?

 

[Charles_Main]

Isn't that THE definition of cognitive dissonance?

Please advise.

How can one be pro Abortion and against the Death Penalty? Now that is THE definition of cognitive dissonance?

Where is the comparison between killing innocent unborn babies, and Putting to death a convicted murderer?

 

[Zona]

I'm pro-choice, that was one of the dumbest original posts I've ever read. It should've been deleted after someone said innocent and guilty.

The question I have, that may have already been asked, is how there's almost always a connection between being pro-life and having a positive view of wars. This is what causes me to conclude that pro-lifers more often then not aren't worried about saving innocent babies, the more important aspect is having their religion forced on someone else.

I would think if someone finds it so important to save unborn american babies, that they would also find it important to save born Iraqi/Afghani/Pakistani/Libyan babies as well.

bullshit

Agreed. Most people who are pro life are against war and are really against capital punishment.

Righty?

 

[Charles_Main]

Isn't that THE definition of cognitive dissonance?

Please advise.

How can one be pro Abortion and against the Death Penalty? Now that is THE definition of cognitive dissonance.

Where is the comparison between killing innocent unborn babies, and Putting to death a convicted murderer?

Even asking this question betrays your complete lack of a moral compass.

I am against the Killing of innocent babies, in anything but extreme cases. I am for the Death penalty for Convicted murders of the most terrible kind. Explain to me how that does not make sense.

Your entire premise is based on the idea that Killing convicted murderers is one and the same with Killing innocent unborn children. If you do not see the difference you are even more warped than I thought before this post.

 

[Immanuel]

There are numerous safeguards against this, not the least of which is the threat of disbarrment of the prosecutor.


Neither. Withheld evidence will never get that far.

I hope you are right, but I'm not positive that you are.

Anything is possible, but the process, especially when the defense attorney is doing his job, is designed to reduce errors to as near zero as possib.e

Let me ask you a hypothetical and first are you an attorney?

Not at this moment.

Here is the hypothetical, if withheld evidence did get that far, would you consider it murder on behalf of a prosecutor?

Depends. Was it a deliberate act, intended to cause the death of the defendant?

Well, it is a hypothetical, but I was thinking yes, it was deliberate, but not necessarily to bring about the death of the defendant. More like to boost his conviction rate and win political points.

Not yet? If that means you are in law school, good luck in finishing your schooling and completing the bar exam.

Also, I know and understand the system is set up to minimize the potential. I'm simply losing confidence in the system.

Immie

 

[Zona]

Isn't that THE definition of cognitive dissonance?

Please advise.

I may be wrong, but i don't think a fetus has ever committed a felony.


Now, how can one be simultaneously pro abortion and anti death penalty? ....

From what I understand about pro life people its all about the sanctity of life! LIFE..

Not what crime the unwanted child does later in life.

 

[Liability]

Isn't that THE definition of cognitive dissonance?

Please advise.

I may be wrong, but i don't think a fetus has ever committed a felony.


Now, how can one be simultaneously pro abortion and anti death penalty? ....

From what I understand about pro life people its all about the sanctity of life! LIFE..

Not what crime the unwanted child does later in life.

From what YOU "understand" about ANYTHING, nothing useful can ever be derived.

The sanctity of life is real. The right to life can be subject to forfeiture under some circumstances. But on what basis can the sanctity of innocent life be forfeited?

Is the mere convenience of the mother a sufficient basis in a civilized society to justify snuffing out an innocent life?

 

[RadiomanATL]

I'm pro life and anti death penalty.

But it's not that hard to understand.

Pro saving innocent lives, pro killing parties guilty of heinous crimes.

 

[Samson]

Isn't that THE definition of cognitive dissonance?

Please advise.

Yep.

I much prefer cognitively consistant: "Kill'em all, and let god sort it out" approach

 

[Ravi]

I'm pro life and anti death penalty.

But it's not that hard to understand.

Pro saving innocent lives, pro killing parties guilty of heinous crimes.

Did you mean to say that you were "pro life" and pro death penalty?

IMO, letting the government decide is the ultimate big brother.

 

[Immanuel]

I'm pro life and anti death penalty.

But it's not that hard to understand.

Pro saving innocent lives, pro killing parties guilty of heinous crimes.

Did you mean to say that you were "pro life" and pro death penalty?

IMO, letting the government decide is the ultimate big brother.

Seems to me like you didn't catch the middle sentence.

But it's not that hard to understand.

Meaning he is pro life and anti death penalty but he understands the concept of being pro life and pro death penalty.

Immie

 

[Ravi]

I'm pro life and anti death penalty.

But it's not that hard to understand.

Pro saving innocent lives, pro killing parties guilty of heinous crimes.

Did you mean to say that you were "pro life" and pro death penalty?

IMO, letting the government decide is the ultimate big brother.

Seems to me like you didn't catch the middle sentence.

But it's not that hard to understand.

Meaning he is pro life and anti death penalty but he understands the concept of being pro life and pro death penalty.

Immie

Okay, I "understand" it, too, but then again I don't think the government should decide matters of life and death.

 

[RadiomanATL]

I'm pro life and anti death penalty.

But it's not that hard to understand.

Pro saving innocent lives, pro killing parties guilty of heinous crimes.

Did you mean to say that you were "pro life" and pro death penalty?

IMO, letting the government decide is the ultimate big brother.

No. I'm pro life and anti death penalty.

It's the ultimate no-take-backs if something gets screwed up. Something I'm not comfortable with the state having the power to do.