Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 31 to 37 of 37
  1. #31
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    204
    Tokens
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alexxxxx View Post
    So therefore they become some supreme being?

    You've missed my point. Noone has the right to play god, which is essentially what murderers and judges do (when sentencing someone to death). Late-term abortions is the same thing, as you are essentially taking a life, which could stand by itself. As a left winger I do have right wing views on abortion. If a baby can survive (albeit with help and only one baby, ever) after so many weeks, abortions should be made illegal after that point. It's the same principal. No one should have the right to kill. Just because someone else has killed someone doesn't give you a mandate to kill them.
    Indeed they do, they have a better moral base and are qualified to make that decision in a fair, honest and just way.

    A baby is different, that baby hasn't done anything and hasn't murdered anyone. A grown human being can make that decision to murder someone, something which a baby in a womans womb has no concept of.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,366
    Tokens
    325

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    yeah that's what i'm saying, noone has the right to murder a baby, murder a gang member or execute a murderer. They aren't the same people and they don't all have the same 'moral' standing, yet it still doesn't mean that you have the right to kill them. these are my values, I can't prove them to you, i think yours are wrong and bloodthirsty, like an animal, yet you probably think i've lost the plot and that as a collective, someone does infact have the right. I'm telling you mine. There's nothing to argue about.]

    In an ideal world, noone would have to die until their hearts wear out.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    204
    Tokens
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alexxxxx View Post
    yeah that's what i'm saying, noone has the right to murder a baby, murder a gang member or execute a murderer. They aren't the same people and they don't all have the same 'moral' standing, yet it still doesn't mean that you have the right to kill them. these are my values, I can't prove them to you, i think yours are wrong and bloodthirsty, like an animal, yet you probably think i've lost the plot and that as a collective, someone does infact have the right. I'm telling you mine. There's nothing to argue about.]

    In an ideal world, noone would have to die until their hearts wear out.
    You are missing the point.

    The baby has not done anything.
    The murderer has and knew the consquences.

    Its not blood thirsty, its justice against those who are blood thirsty.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,366
    Tokens
    325

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    NO I AM NOT MISSING THE POINT.

    I AM TELLING YOU, YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL SOMEONE. END OF. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THEY ARE A CHILD, A GANG MEMBER OR A MURDERER WHO KNEW EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE DOING, IN MY VALUES, NOONE HAS THE RIGHT TO KILL ANYONE. Even if someone was to kill my whole family, I would probably want them to die in a painful manner, yet, even though I feel this, it isn't right for that to happen.

    Eye for an Eye just makes the whole world blind.

    It's like you've ignored everything i've said.

    It IS bloodthirsty. You want BLOOD. You want someone to DIE. It's bloodthirsty justice. It's animal-like behavior.

    I think your values are horrible, archaic, yet I know it's what some people believe and i can see why people would think it's ok, in certain ways of thought.
    Last edited by alexxxxx; 16-09-2009 at 10:21 PM.

  5. #35
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    204
    Tokens
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alexxxxx View Post
    NO I AM NOT MISSING THE POINT.

    I AM TELLING YOU, YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO KILL SOMEONE. END OF. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF THEY ARE A CHILD, A GANG MEMBER OR A MURDERER WHO KNEW EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE DOING, IN MY VALUES, NOONE HAS THE RIGHT TO KILL ANYONE. Even if someone was to kill my whole family, I would probably want them to die in a painful manner, yet, even though I feel this, it isn't right for that to happen.

    Eye for an Eye just makes the whole world blind.

    It's like you've ignored everything i've said.

    It IS bloodthirsty. You want BLOOD. You want someone to DIE. It's bloodthirsty justice. It's animal-like behavior.

    I think your values are horrible, archaic, yet I know it's what some people believe and i can see why people would think it's ok, in certain ways of thought.
    I have listened to everything you've said, you have brought up abortion which is nothing like to sending a brutal murderer to be executed. I do want them to die yes, its not animal like because they knew the consquences and they chose to kill somebody in a blood thirsty manner, therefore they are executed in a fair and humane way for their crime/s.

    An eye for a eye may make the world blind, but at least its a just and fair world we'd be living in.

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,366
    Tokens
    325

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UKIP View Post
    I have listened to everything you've said, you have brought up abortion which is nothing like to sending a brutal murderer to be executed. I do want them to die yes, its not animal like because they knew the consquences and they chose to kill somebody in a blood thirsty manner, therefore they are executed in a fair and humane way for their crime/s.

    An eye for a eye may make the world blind, but at least its a just and fair world we'd be living in.
    you see, this is where we have the differences,

    my values say that abortion and execution are as bad as each other as you are playing god,

    whilst yours says that it's ok to play god because the law says so.

    voila.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    12,405
    Tokens
    0

    Latest Awards:

    Default

    I think the risk of an innocent person receiving the death penalty greatly cancels out the argument to have it reinstated. I mean come on, imagine if somehow you were suddenly being sentenced to death for something you had nothing to do with. :S

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •