Then, uh, maybe you can address where I said or implied it was a "show"?






No, but there's a difference between, uh, "temporary" and, uh, "permanent" if you, uh, look them up in a book called a "dictionary". In that book, you may notice that there's a difference between those two words. If you have, uh, difficulty telling the difference, maybe someone can help you out.

With capital punishment, an execution is "permanent", but if the person was imprisoned, then the effect may only be "temporary".



If you want to be sarcastic, I can be sarcastic back. And what is gained by that, Asimov? Attempts to demean someone is nothing short of character assassination, so let me suggest that you make an attempt not to make yourself look good by putting others down. If that's not important to you, then I'd prefer if you avoid my posts and I'll promise never to comment on yours.

__________________
"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge."-- Einstein

I'm against, I don't think the death penalty is a deterrent, mistakes can be made and from what I see it's a rather arbitrary system of punishing those who commit the most serious crimes depending on the legal system. It's just a method of reciprocal punishment that can be better served by removing freedom from the person that committed the crime and having them live with what they have done and the consequences every day of their lives.

__________________
Nothing in life is to be feared. It is only to be understood. Marie Curie

"killing someone who kills someone to show that killing someone is wrong"

That is saying and implying that the death penalty is a show, or a demonstration.


LOL, I've already explained that the morality of the death penalty in regards to executing guilty criminals (people who HAVE committed crimes) is mutually exclusive from the practicality of the death penalty. I've also already demonstrated that I do not support the death penalty for singular crimes of passion, criminals that are not serial criminals or career criminals, or in the cases of monetarily based crimes that can be worked off (unless they are career criminals).

Let's say we put someone away for life, with no chance of parole. They're in the slammer for 80 years (let's say they were indicted on accounts of robbing a bank and raping and murdering a woman, premeditatively). After 80 years the guy is almost a hundred years old, and is released from prison on account of him not actually having committed those crimes. You're saying that locking someone up for 80 years who was innocent, revoking their rights and forcing them into isolation and a life of toil and hardship is ok and not taking their life from them?

What about 50 years?
25 years?








I wasn't being sarcastic, nor was I demeaning you.

uh - # used when hesitating in speaking, as while searching for a word or collecting one's thoughts: a prolonged sound

uh - definition of uh from YourDictionary.com

There's nothing demeaning or sarcastic about saying "uh". You, on the other hand, were being sarcastic AND demeaning by attacking my character on nothing more than a common sound that was written out.

Come on Asimov, you can do better than that. I think it would be quite clear why I was posting sarcasm-- to hopefully help you understand, apparently to no avail, that the use of sarcasm gets us where? And I've been around enough to know what the "uh" means, and that was by no means the only post whereas you attempted to demean someone. Your frequent use of sarcastic expressions tells us much more about you than it does those whom you are being sarcastic towards, such as mooomooo on the other thread.

If you wish to post in such a way so as to toot your own horn by demeaning others, and then lie by denying what is clearly obvious, then I have simply no desire to deal with such an individual. You know what you were doing and so do I, and instead of making an attempt to remedy the situation, you resort to the above. How pathetic.

Goodbye.

__________________
"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge."-- Einstein

I don't use sarcastic expressions, you interpret my expressions as being sarcastic, and now you're detracting from the discussion by attacking my character.


LOL, now you're calling me a liar? An interpretetive attitude on your part equals me lying?

Right.

Just for the record, you'll never catch me calling anyone a "liar". There's a big difference between saying someone is "lying" versus calling someone a "liar".

__________________
"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge."-- Einstein

I vote against capital punishment excepting perhaps only the most virulent repeat offenders who will not reform and continue on with their brutality. But it would have to be provable beyond doubt that it was that person. Given that evidence can be planted, even DNA type evidence, it is very difficult to prove so it is a very thorny issue.

I am totally against the new prison system which has become a commodity which can be invested into as a growth industry. Crime has now become profitable in the sense of making money off the proceeds of crime without commiting a crime, merely in investing in prison stock.


Now they just fry their brains with drugs (legal pharma) which are used routinely on prisoners.

Rehabilitation programs are a joke. That whole system needs rehabilitation.