search results matching tag: 1808

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

  • 1
    Videos (2)     Sift Talk (0)     Blogs (1)     Comments (13)   

Republicans: Pro-Life or Pro-Death?

ChaosEngine says...

>> ^quantumushroom:

Death penalty:
"The 775 killers who were executed between 1998 and 2008 had murdered at least 1591 people. That is an average of 2 victims per executed killer."
Liberals never quite get around to thinking about the victims of the convicted murderers on death row; not ONE of the latter has ever been proven innocent--posthumously or otherwise--since the 1950s.
"If we are to abolish the death penalty, I should like to see the first step taken by my friends the murderers."
-- Alphonse Karr (1808-1890)


Irrelevant (and also wrong, but anyway). Leaving aside the questionable morality of state-sponsored revenge killing, it fails both as a tool for law enforcement and as a fiscally conservative policy. It costs way more to execute someone than to incarcerate them for life.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Ron Paul Health Care: it was a loaded, piss-poor question and liberals know it. Why? Because there are two scenarios for the question. Is our theoretical 30-year-old living in "our" world where there is de facto socialist health care in the USA? I asked someone with a degree in Hospital Admin what would be his fate. Her answer: "If he has no insurance, his care is free."
OR is the scenario taking place in a libertarian free market health care world, which has NEVER been allowed to exist?
I gots no problems with liberal foolishness; it exists in abundance. What I despise is intellectual dishonesty and these crafted propagandist soundbites from the original source, not even the smarmy Liberalviewer, were just that.


It's a reasonable question. No, that world (thankfully) doesn't exist, but it's a world RP wants to create. We're entitled to know how his pie-in-the-sky bullshit would pan out in the real world.

And to hear a conservative complain about intellectual dishonesty and crafted soundbites is really the pot calling the kettle black.

Republicans: Pro-Life or Pro-Death?

quantumushroom says...

Death penalty:

"The 775 killers who were executed between 1998 and 2008 had murdered at least 1591 people. That is an average of 2 victims per executed killer."

Liberals never quite get around to thinking about the victims of the convicted murderers on death row; not ONE of the latter has ever been proven innocent--posthumously or otherwise--since the 1950s.

"If we are to abolish the death penalty, I should like to see the first step taken by my friends the murderers."
-- Alphonse Karr (1808-1890)


Ron Paul Health Care: it was a loaded, piss-poor question and liberals know it. Why? Because there are two scenarios for the question. Is our theoretical 30-year-old living in "our" world where there is de facto socialist health care in the USA? I asked someone with a degree in Hospital Admin what would be his fate. Her answer: "If he has no insurance, his care is free."

OR is the scenario taking place in a libertarian free market health care world, which has NEVER been allowed to exist?

I gots no problems with liberal foolishness; it exists in abundance. What I despise is intellectual dishonesty and these crafted propagandist soundbites from the original source, not even the smarmy Liberalviewer, were just that.

"We Have Had Enough Of Police Brutality We Will Fight Back."

Lawdeedaw says...

Life sentences under that would be fine. Give them a few appeals (Because me and you would never want to be in jail without ever having an appeal,) and leave them to rot in their icy tomb. If they can prove their innocence, fine. If not, ice...

>> ^quantumushroom:

QM, you think the death penalty is a good thing? How barbaric and archaic.

Mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent.
What is barbaric are the acts committed by the scum. What is outrageous is these cowards, when captured and unfortunately taken alive, fight tooth and nail to stay among the living. A tiny minority of killers are truly insane, the rest are simply chickensh;t vermin.
I'm all for life sentences and abolishing the death penalty IF these fks were actually being punished. They should all be shipped to a federally-run gulag in Alaska where they would engage in hard icy labor till they died of old age. No visitors, no TV, no movies, extremely limited communication with the outside world. Perhaps a few old books. Now there's no liberal ACLUmunist worth his hammer and sickle that's going to stand for such an arrangement.
"If we are to abolish the death penalty, I should like to see the first step taken by my friends the murderers."
-- Alphonse Karr (1808-1890)

"We Have Had Enough Of Police Brutality We Will Fight Back."

quantumushroom says...


QM, you think the death penalty is a good thing? How barbaric and archaic.


Mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent.

What is barbaric are the acts committed by the scum. What is outrageous is these cowards, when captured and unfortunately taken alive, fight tooth and nail to stay among the living. A tiny minority of killers are truly insane, the rest are simply chickensh;t vermin.

I'm all for life sentences and abolishing the death penalty IF these fks were actually being punished. They should all be shipped to a federally-run gulag in Alaska where they would engage in hard icy labor till they died of old age. No visitors, no TV, no movies, extremely limited communication with the outside world. Perhaps a few old books. Now there's no liberal ACLUmunist worth his hammer and sickle that's going to stand for such an arrangement.



"If we are to abolish the death penalty, I should like to see the first step taken by my friends the murderers."
-- Alphonse Karr (1808-1890)

Matthews Gets Birther Congressman to Admit Obama is US-Born

rychan says...

>> ^westy:
What the real argument should be is WHY THE HELL DOSE IT MATTER WHAT GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION SUM ONE WAS BORN .
OH HANG ON IS IT BECAUSE AMERICANS ARE RACIST AND XENOPHOBIC ?


Are you sincerely asking? It's part of the constitution. Were the writers of the constitution racist? Of course! The constitution directly codified slavery (3/5ths compromise, restriction from banning the import of slaves until 1808).

But the "natural born citizen" term in the constitution is not born out of racism. Here is the likely history of how it came to be, from:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_born_citizen

"July 25, 1787 letter from John Jay to George Washington. John Jay wrote: "Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen." There was no debate, and this qualification for the office of the Presidency was introduced by the drafting Committee of Eleven, and then adopted without discussion by the Constitutional Convention."

America's "Christian" Heritage

jimnms says...

It's funny that this guy quotes Thomas Jefferson, when Thomas Jefferson was not a christian, and quite often spoke out against christianity and organized religion.

"I may grow rich by an art I am compelled to follow; I may recover health by medicines I am compelled to take against my own judgment; but I cannot be saved by a worship I disbelieve and abhor."

"Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, and imprisoned; yet we have not advanced one inch toward uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one-half the world fools and the other half hypocrites." (Notes on Virginia, 1782)


He should read some of the letters Thomas Jefferson wrote to the religious institutions of that time, like this one to the Virginia Baptists in 1808:
"Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. State churches that use government power to support themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of the church tends to make the clergy unresponsive to the people and leads to corruption within religion. Erecting the "wall of separation between church and state," therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society."

Cheer Up VideoSift (Blog Entry by swampgirl)

reason (Member Profile)

jimnms says...

In reply to this comment by reason:
Get organized? You atheist zealots have been organized for years. Banning nativity scenes in public areas. Banning crosses at federal cemeteries, and banning the ten commandments displayed in court houses. As a Christian I'm offended by all the fashionable anti religion demonstrations. I believe my right to freedom of expression is being infringed upon. What happened to freedom of religion? Separation of church and state is not in the constitution, look it up you self righteous atheist morons. You have elevated atheism to a new religion so you better ban that too, along with global warming, the latest liberal religion.
----------

As an American, I'm offended by Christian's trying to claim that this country was founded on their religion or principles. America may be made up of a majority of people calling themselves Christians, but "...though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will, to be rightful, must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal laws must protect, and to violate which would be oppression." (Thomas Jefferson, in his First Inaugural Address)

Separation of church and state is in the constitution! It's in the first amendment. It may not contain the phrase "separation of church and state," but it's clear from the founding father's writings that the first amendment is clearly intended to keep separate the church and state. Who would know better than it's author, James Madison:

"Congress should not establish a religion and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience, or that one sect might obtain a pre-eminence, or two combined together, and establish a religion to which they would compel others to conform." (James Madison, Annals of Congress, 1789)

"Strongly guarded as is the separation between religion and & Government in the Constitution of the United States the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history." (James Madison, Detached Memoranda, 1820)

"Every new and successful example, therefore, of a perfect separation between the ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance; and I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater purity the less they are mixed together." (James Madison, Letter to Edward Livingston, 1822)

The phrase "separation of church and state" was first used by Thomas Jefferson in 1802, in a letter to the Danbury Baptists: "Believing that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."

Jefferson used the phrase again to a letter written to the Virginia Baptists in 1808: "Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. State churches that use government power to support themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of the church tends to make the clergy unresponsive to the people and leads to corruption within religion. Erecting the "wall of separation between church and state," therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society."

HR.888: Rewriting America's History

jimnms says...

As an American, I'm offended by Christian's trying to claim that this country was founded on their religion or principles. America may be made up of a majority of people calling themselves Christians, but "...though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will, to be rightful, must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal laws must protect, and to violate which would be oppression." (Thomas Jefferson, in his First Inaugural Address)

Separation of church and state is in the constitution! It's in the first amendment. It may not contain the phrase "separation of church and state," but it's clear from the founding father's writings that the first amendment is clearly intended to keep separate the church and state. Who would know better than it's author, James Madison:

"Congress should not establish a religion and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience, or that one sect might obtain a pre-eminence, or two combined together, and establish a religion to which they would compel others to conform." (James Madison, Annals of Congress, 1789)

"Strongly guarded as is the separation between religion and & Government in the Constitution of the United States the danger of encroachment by Ecclesiastical Bodies, may be illustrated by precedents already furnished in their short history." (James Madison, Detached Memoranda, 1820)

"Every new and successful example, therefore, of a perfect separation between the ecclesiastical and civil matters, is of importance; and I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in showing that religion and Government will both exist in greater purity the less they are mixed together." (James Madison, Letter to Edward Livingston, 1822)

The phrase "separation of church and state" was first used by Thomas Jefferson in 1802, in a letter to the Danbury Baptists: "Believing that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their Legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State."

Jefferson used the phrase again to a letter written to the Virginia Baptists in 1808: "Because religious belief, or non-belief, is such an important part of every person's life, freedom of religion affects every individual. State churches that use government power to support themselves and force their views on persons of other faiths undermine all our civil rights. Moreover, state support of the church tends to make the clergy unresponsive to the people and leads to corruption within religion. Erecting the "wall of separation between church and state," therefore, is absolutely essential in a free society."

The Happy New Year Thread (Sift Talk Post)

The Happy New Year Thread (Sift Talk Post)

30 Minutes To Die By Lethal Injection

quantumushroom says...

The victims of this sh-tbag more than grimaced a little when "Angel" shot them or hacked them to death with a machete.

"If we are to abolish the death penalty, I should like to see the first step taken by my friends the murderers."
-- Alphonse Karr (1808-1890)

Mercy toward the guilty is cruelty to the innocent.
--Adam Smith

Let The Sift-War Begin... (Sift Talk Post)

  • 1


Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon