Are you pro-death?

[incog]

I'm pro-choice and when I want to check out, I don't want anybody telling me I can't. I am anti death penalty but only because I think juries will fuck it up.

[Bacchus88]

Pro-choice its on you to make that choice no other.
Pro-death Death Row should be quick not 17 years. 2-5 years tops to make the appeals after that make it very public and bring back the gallows.
pro-euthanasia should cover a little more than just suicide rights.

[Vexbeast]

I am pro-death across the board politically.

Sums it up for me...

and anti-death penalty as it is administered currently (again, no entertainment value. Gladiatorial combat has it charms.)

Two words, Unreal Tournament.

Though giving guns to murderers is not always the best solution...

*standing ovation*

Seconded

[Bacchus88]

Why guns? if we going to sport at out it, melee weapons only. Brutality sales pay-pre view rights, betting, offshore betting Capitalism at it finest. Entertainment value for masses, profit, and see justice carried out by some just as brutal as the criminal. Every 2 weeks 3 hour event, of Americas worst criminals.

Plan B
Forlorn Hope

[Raza]

I want exclusive rights to film all this. I actually don't have a problem with any of it (in principle anyways) as long as there is definitive proof of consent.

OEC

Sorry; in the unlikely event I actually get to rule a country or someshit, I'm doing away with intellectual property too.


And of course, 'definitive proof of consent' is the big obstacle here, since it's rather difficult to ascertain when one of those consenting won't be around to testify after the fact, and I wouldn't trust any current governments in control of the administration of such voluntary deaths regardless of how ingenious a method they'll claim to use.

On the other hand, I don't believe that governments have the right to deny an individual that didn't volunteer to abide by their laws (and none work that way right now) the freedom to do something they want to and are able to realise without harming another - with anything consented to not qualifying as 'harm' regardless of how large a majority of others would consider it undesirable. I understand the need to check on consent in matters like this and the difficulty of doing so, but mere practicality doesn't change the fact that consent is meaningful regardless of whether some self-assigned 'authority' decides to approve of the channels through which it is given.


Frankly, this isn't an issue that's going to see an ethically perfect answer for another few centuries. You'd need at the very least a world divided, if at all, in self-ruled voluntary collectives rather than lines drawn in the fucking sand by historical megalomaniacs. Representative 'democracy' and the nation-state model are inadequate for solving it without leaving a major hole one place or another.

[Vix]

i dont understand...can someone plz spell it out for me?

[soma_stardust]

everyone has the right to die.
sometimes you are forced to choose that someone dies.
everyone dies anyway.

~soma~

[Vix]

i am drunk, and have had a closer look at your poll.
Here is my thoughts. I dont understand much of it..
And I will only comment on what I personally know and or have experienced. Pro Choice is the obvious answer, to which I most certainly agree with.
I am also pro suiciadal, and those that know me will know why. Most suicidal cases just have no will to live, I understand that.

I am However against death penality. No one deserves to die... NO matter what criminal offence. It is weird typing this as I am so against it. Giving life is our choice, but taking it is another matter.

We are Not Gods... nothing even close, we cannot even expect to imagine what will happen if we try to pretend we are worthy of the cycle of life.

[Velvet-Tongue]

Pro-choice, anti death penalty, pro-euthanasia/suicide rights

Used to be a big supporter of the death penalty untill I researched it.

Heres why im against it now.

1) Makes us look bad in the politcal arena
2) Innocent people have and will be executed.
3) Costs almost 3 times as much to give someone the death penalty as opposed to life in jail (It costs so much because of appeals).
4) In my eyes life in jail is much more horrifying then death.

The only pro is it gives a certain kind of relief to the families of victims.

[Cafe_Post_Mortem]

Pro-Death across the board. I understand people's objections to the death penalty, with the DNA and such in the past, but now we DO have the ability to be accurate.

We have had the ability to be accurate for a long time, the problem is we lack the will. People are still sent to death on the word of witnesses with no physical evidence.

And really, how many people on death row can afford DNA testing when it does matter?

[jonny.illuminati]

We have had the ability to be accurate for a long time, the problem is we lack the will. People are still sent to death on the word of witnesses with no physical evidence.

And really, how many people on death row can afford DNA testing when it does matter?

the state pays for DNA testing when it can prove innocence... as long as there is DNA evidence available... not everyone leaves DNA at the scene of a crime

[Vix]

Pro-choice, anti death penalty, pro-euthanasia/suicide rights

Used to be a big supporter of the death penalty untill I researched it.

Heres why im against it now.

1) Makes us look bad in the politcal arena
2) Innocent people have and will be executed.
3) Costs almost 3 times as much to give someone the death penalty as opposed to life in jail (It costs so much because of appeals).
4) In my eyes life in jail is much more horrifying then death.

The only pro is it gives a certain kind of relief to the families of victims.

agree 100%

[Cafe_Post_Mortem]

the state pays for DNA testing when it can prove innocence... as long as there is DNA evidence available... not everyone leaves DNA at the scene of a crime

Which state? We got 50 of them you know. Besides someone (usually the sate) has to decide if they think it is worth it to do the test. They do not always decide it is even when the soon to be executed would strongly disagrees.

For me to support the death penalty again there would need to be some serious standardization of what qualifies, how evidence is handles and how appeals are handled. As it stands now it is waaay too sloppy to bet someone's life on.

[Cafe_Post_Mortem]

4) In my eyes life in jail is much more horrifying then death.

This one always confused me from the anti death penalty crowd. Is it better to torture someone for 50 years than to just put them down? People say I am cruel for wanting to have a lot of repeat violent offenders put down, but that is some messed up right there.

[Buster Friendly]

As a polar opposite to this discussion, I once met a young man who espoused what he termed a "consistent pro-life ethic". He was a born again christian, who was against abortion, however he was also against the death penalty, a pacifist, anti-war, and a very strict vegan.

The other activist kids ran him off for his views on abortion, but I thought his argument had some merit. I disagreed with him, but was willing to give him some respect for being "pro-life" across the board. Kind of funny that the other pacifist, peace activist, vegan kids chased him away based on his religious, and fetus views. (I will also note that some of the most hard core peace activist, and activist for social justice come from a religious back ground, and view point. Although not usually born agains. Quakers especially, were noted for their strong social activism, for abolition and civil rights as well.)

[Obscuria.com]

Pro- Choice all the way around. To preface this, I saw an interesting bumper sticker on a car yesterday, "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind".

But, shit we should have the choice. Per abortion, it's a woman body, she should have the choice within a reasonable time frame to do as she please, (sorry I can't define "reasonable timeframe". Pro- Death, well there are only so many scumbags our tax dollars (what little of them get funneled back in to the U.S.)should pay to keep alive.
If your sick and dying, or hell, even just want out, you should have the choice and even availability of options to do so. Don't some astronauts/military have special pills that peacefully drift you off into sleep, then physical death? Not saying these should be available at 7-11, but within much easier reach.

[soma_stardust]

from my perspective, "reasonable time frame" would be pretty much as long as the fetus cannot survive outside the womb. however long that is. i believe it's the third trimester. 6-9 months. i'm not positive about this.

[Obscuria.com]

from my perspective, "reasonable time frame" would be pretty much as long as the fetus cannot survive outside the womb. however long that is. i believe it's the third trimester. 6-9 months. i'm not positive about this.

ok, thanks.

[Black Spiral Dancer]

I went for the first one. Pro-Choice as a woman should be able to choose whether she has a child. Pro-Death Penalty in cases where the guilty party is definitely guilty (caught on video killing someone, witnessed plunging the knife into the victim's chest). Pro-Euthanasia in that if the person's quality of life is below a certain level and they have expressed a wish that they would like the option to assisted suicide.

If I was in that position, I'd like to think that my loved ones would consider my happiness and switch off the machine.

[incog]

from my perspective, "reasonable time frame" would be pretty much as long as the fetus cannot survive outside the womb. however long that is. i believe it's the third trimester. 6-9 months. i'm not positive about this.

As technology improves they really will be able to grow a baby in a test tube entirely. I think third trimester abortions are uncool. It should not take until such a sketchy time to decide.