Supreme Court Rules against Death for Child Rape

[Wudge]

Girl, we can't get much higher!!! LOL

There's no Constitutional basis for this ruling. It's just more legislation from the bench by liberal Justices.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

There's no Constitutional basis for this ruling. It's just more legislation from the bench by liberal Justices.

I try to not get discouraged by this sort of thing. I think it will happen one day. America is getting pretty sick and tired of her children being raped by these monsters. Something more drastic will need to be done, IMO.

 

[Wudge]

I try to not get discouraged by this sort of thing. I think it will happen one day. America is getting pretty sick and tired of her children being raped by these monsters. Something more drastic will need to be done, IMO.

There is human law, and there is God's law. In Rowe v. Wade, the Justices decided they were God. That put anything and everything within their power.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

There is human law, and there is God's law. In Rowe v. Wade, the Justices decided they were God. That put anything and everything within their power.

Wudge, Wudge, Wudge. . . you know I love ya, but :slap:

 

[Wudge]

Wudge, Wudge, Wudge. . . you know I love ya, but :slap:

You would say to the 50,000,000 dead babies?

 

[Jeana (DP)]

You would say to the 50,000,000 dead babies?

What am I supposed to say?

 

[Wudge]

What am I supposed to say?

The Justices decided: we are God. They did not have a soul, no harm. I say, grave error. To be so called, when they pass on, by a power far greater than they.

In reading Justice Breyer's opinion today, I was struck by: "they cannot be compared to murder in their 'severity and irrevocability". Given Rowe v. Wade, to me, that represents the epitome of horrendous hypocrisy.

 

[Jeana (DP)]

The Justices decided: we are God. They did not have a soul, no harm. I say, grave error. To be so called, when they pass on, by a power far greater than they.

In reading Justice Breyer's opinion today, I was struck by: "they cannot be compared to murder in their 'severity and irrevocability". Given Rowe v. Wade, to me, that represents the epitome of horrendous hypocrisy.

Well darlin, I'm not one of the Justices.

 

[southcitymom]

Girl, we can't get much higher!!! LOL

Hey - you know I'm an idealist and damned proud of our standards, but every nation needs something to aim for!

 

[Jeana (DP)]

Hey - you know I'm an idealist and damned proud of our standards, but every nation needs something to aim for!

Let's aim for no more crime then.:blowkiss:

 

[southcitymom]

Pervs kill no matter what if they're the type to kill - for them being locked up without access to a child is the worst punishment.

IIRC, amicus briefs were filed with the Court (honestly don't recall if it was the Supreme Court or some of the lowers) regarding this issue - ie: if the DP is a possibility will molesters kill the child instead of perhaps letting the child live. I remember reading a number of articles about it.

 

[southcitymom]

Let's aim for no more crime then.:blowkiss:

We can stand together on that platform forever.:blowkiss:

 

[Jeana (DP)]

IIRC, amicus briefs were filed with the Court (honestly don't recall if it was the Supreme Court or some of the lowers) regarding this issue - ie: if the DP is a possibility will molesters kill the child instead of perhaps letting the child live. I remember reading a number of articles about it.

I do think that its definately something to take into consideration. However, we're not talking about executing the everyday run of the mill child molester. They're talking about the worst of the very freaking worst of these guys who honestly do not deserve even to live one more day. Besides, just as someone said earlier that there are worse things than death - being raped multiple times by a pervert over and over and over and over and over may just be one of them. Some of these guys may not kill their victim's bodies, but they definately kill their souls, their spirit and take their childhoods from them.

 

[southcitymom]

I do think that its definately something to take into consideration. However, we're not talking about executing the everyday run of the mill child molester. They're talking about the worst of the very freaking worst of these guys who honestly do not deserve even to live one more day. Besides, just as someone said earlier that there are worse things than death - being raped multiple times by a pervert over and over and over and over and over may just be one of them. Some of these guys may not kill their victim's bodies, but they definately kill their souls, their spirit and take their childhoods from them.

I just finished reading it. Both opinions - majority and dissenting - were interesting and well-presented. The majority opinion did talk about the "will the rapist then kill" issue as part of its decision.

The dissenters said that states who wanted to make DP an option for child rape could and should enact corraborating laws so that it really would tag the worst of the worst (multiple rape, rape with battery, kidnapping rape by stranger, etc...).

I do not believe the man this case was decided on was the "worst of the worst," but don't think it would have mattered. If he was the "worst of the worst" I believe the majority would have still held the same opinion.

It's a hugely charged issue, and I know I am not a particularly objective observer because I agree with any ruling that limits the DP in our country.

 

[Glow]

I would, if necessary, use deadly force to protect someone. But a person locked in a cell is in no such position.

I do agree that sometimes the choice to kill is more understandable than others. Also I agree that we, as a society, are okay with killing humans, given the circumstance.

Hi South,

I missed your reply somehow.

So in that moment, you could put someone to death for what they are about to do.

How is it worse if they are put to death later for what they actually did do?

 

[philamena]

There are worse things you can do to a person than murder them.

Not legally. Then again maybe I misunderstood your post.
I realized you're not referring to the child rapist getting the DP.

 

[southcitymom]

Hi South,

I missed your reply somehow.

So in that moment, you could put someone to death for what they are about to do.

How is it worse if they are put to death later for what they actually did do?

In the moment, it would be passionate and reactionary - kill instead of be killed - kill or have another killed. The danger is present and instant and instinct and the will to live and be safe takes over. I can understand how that happens in people and could foresee it happening to me or any other human being.

The DP is dispassionate and considered.

I would prefer never to take someone's life - either passionately or dispassionately. If I had any aim, I would shoot to wound!:crazy:

 

[southcitymom]

Not legally.

That made me chuckle!

 

[philamena]

hey there SCM.

 

[Glow]

In the moment, it would be passionate and reactionary - kill instead of be killed - kill or have another killed. The danger is present and instant and instinct and the will to live and be safe takes over. I can understand how that happens in people and could foresee it happening to me or any other human being.

The DP is dispassionate and considered.

I would prefer never to take someone's life - either passionately or dispassionately. If I had any aim, I would shoot to wound!:crazy:

well if we follow that line of thought, then if that same man walked up in a grocery store and hit your child, wouldnt you not only stop him in the moment but prosecute him later? That would be cold and dispassionate and considered justice, but it would still be a good thing.

Im a hard hearted Hannah - I would probably kill the man in both instances.