I would tack on a death sentence for the macarena.

I'll commute your death sentence if you do the macarena!

This is my view on that in brief:
The command to put those to death who work on the Sabbath was delivered to the Jewish people in those times, and it was enforced as I understand... however there were ways to earn forgiveness for such sins by certain well-defined sacrifices and ceremony, such as the "sin-offereing." The first four books of the Bible contain a great deal of law, but also a great deal of ways to attain atonement for violations. This was part of the foundation of the concept of sinning and receiving forgiveness via sacrifice, a preamble to the saving power of the last ultimate sacrifice, Jesus, which applied that atonement to all sin in everyone. The Jewish people today have developed a tradition that defines the rules such as these in extreme detail (since they have no such savior yet). I can't further speak specifically for them as I am not one.

As for Christians, the death of Christ (who committed no sin and who was also God) on the cross took the death sentence for all who accept it (the final and perfect Sin Offering, God giving His own life). Therefore, working on the Sabbath (for example) might be a sin (and "the wages of sin is death"), but the price has been paid... for everyone, every time. Anyway, most Christians consider that "work" that is done for the Lord is perfectly acceptable on the sabbath, which is Sunday for Christians. Jesus spoke on this a couple of times and it can be applied to the work we do or must do on Sundays. I cannot speak for the Jews, but Christians have valid doctrine pertaining to these laws and how Christ translated them into our current doctrinal law. As for differences in sects of religions, many times the differences are based on tradition, but in the cases that they are different based on biblical interpretations, they often agree on the concept of grace through faith, which is central to the faith.

You're also right that certain people don't want religion to be a big part of their life so they might get together with those in a sect that likewise want a surface belief. Even the bible says that they are only missing out on what they could have, live, and eventually have in eternity. Unfortunate, but Jesus' sacrifice is sufficient despite.

I just had a really interesting conversation with gorillaman that I think is very much related to this conversation. Here it is:

Me:

I'm curious as to why you think that all cops deserve to die... that seems pretty harsh, don't you think? Sure, some are assholes that don't deserve a badge, let alone a gun... but all cops?

Him:

Prohibition is a crime against humanity, its agents are the enemies of mankind and deserve to die. This is evident truth - if you consider prohibition in the context of the rights to self-ownership and self-defence you can come to no other reasonable conclusion.

Me:

I assume that you're talking about the right to own guns?
I am all for private ownership of guns. I'm training to be a police officer. Are you saying that I deserve to die just because of my job?

Him:

I was talking about drug prohibition - the cop was arresting the guy because of the giant bag of weed he found while patting him down. In other words he was going to take his freedom away, potentially for years, for doing absolutely nothing wrong. Responding to that kind of aggression with deadly force is not only completely justified, it's downright commendable. The simple fact of prohibition necessarily earns the death sentence for every single person involved in sustaining it.

Being a police officer is not just a job; it will involve the daily initiation of force against sovereign individuals. This is all to the good if the individuals involved have themselves transgressed upon another's freedom, and you act correctly as an agent empowered by society to act in its defense. But your moral authority to act extends only as far as that of those who grant it; one cannot give what one does not already possess. Where the law exceeds the limits dictated by the necessary rights of mankind, where it initiates force against those who have not done the same to the person or property of those in its care, it is corrupt - the law itself becomes a crime.

The moment you put on that badge you will become an agent of corruption, you will inherit your criminality from those who empower you and you will deserve to die. If you support prohibition as a private citizen you already do.

Me:

Hmm.. your views and opinions are obviously very deeply rooted. While I disagree with what you say, I would fight to the death to defend your right to say it.
But surely you must admit that as a citizen of any advanced culture, that there are certain rules that one must follow? Surely you feel that someone has to uphold these laws, no matter how you feel about them? Or is it that you feel you have the rights that you want, save the right to possess and use drugs?
I am deeply disturbed that you wish death upon your fellow man, neigh, wish death upon me for wanted to enforce the laws of our society.
For that, I do feel very sorry for you.

Edit: So, after all that, let me ask you a non-rhetorical question. If your car was stolen, or you witnessed a murder, or someone broke into your house, or someone killed your wife/mom/dad/sister whatever, you're telling me that you would forgo calling the cops? You wouldn't want any law enforcement trying to capture the monster that killed your own family/significant other?
______________________________________________________________________

We'll see where it goes from there.

Arlen Specter's (R-PA) questions were very good (one of them at t-3:50); he is a former district attorney, so it wasn't surprising. But every single one went unanswered, including a question about Constitutional Law in general, and another about a capital punishment death sentence Att Gen Gonzalez signed off on recently (clips from this appear towards the end). It was wild. Sen. Specter was getting upset. Specter noted that he still remembers from his District Attorney days every detail of every capital punishment case he ever signed off on. He earns another gold star for effort in my book.

... again, thats conservative Republican Sen. Arlen Specter I'm talking about. Its not conservative vs. liberal, its American justice system vs. cover-ups.

And keep in mind all these clips are from a single hearing appearance, not from someone hunting around for clips to support a particular position.

but millions of other people also read that book, and didnt do what he did, so I would like to exclude that as the main reason.

Then all that remains is to find another reason. It is true that most muslims are not psychopaths, thats for damn sure, but the way I see it, no credit is due to Islam, the Quran or Muhammad for that. The reason most people dont behave at all the way these delusional fantasies says you should behave, is that on some level, reason kicks in with most people. Morals are innate. We have them genetically, and society shapes them and we cant help to think for ourselves from time to time, apologies due to Muhammad on that last one.

Again, if Islam is your ONLY influence, if it has indeed infected every part of society, top to bottom, you are in effect living in a Taliban-state, and everybody behaves more or less like this lunatic. The state itself, by LAW, can execute people like Theo Van Gogh for insulting the prophet, or god, or "faith" or who the fuck knows.

This persons probably only influence, was the Quran-fantasies, that was probably the only reality he knew, the only place he got his morals and his views about the world, he probably intentionally shut out all other communication with the real world, when we ask ourselves, "where could he possibly have gotten the idea that this was smart?", the answer is obvious: Thats exactly how the Quran wants you to behave, like a submissive, braindead amoeba in Gods hands. Again, people do not generally behave that way, but thats not the fault of the Quran, everything else is to blame for good behavior. Credit where its due. The Quran can only be blamed for the kind of behavior it endorses and promotes.

Lastly, Those same millions of other people are not so much outraged or pissed either when some infidel apostate gets a bullet between the eyes, or when a suicide bomber kills children in the "Name of the Prophet". But when some englishman writes a book, or a couple of Danes draws some cartoons, its riots in the streets, death sentences by proxy and without trial, imams and other charlatans condemning the "hideous acts" left and right, and of course the always so charming Christians who apologize that some faithful loon got offended.

So is the death sentence any more than taking on bad karma??? Cause, hate to admit, if we personally witnessed a ten-year old being raped, the perpetrator would not be having a trial...and if it did survive for a trial, it would not have great motor function.....in other words, it is a matter of how much responsibility one is willing to take for one's actions....and there are some folks that needs killin'.....

as long as any lunatic can say what he wants we call that free speech

I didnt really get this post, but just to be clear on what I mean, "free speech" doesnt mean any idiot should deserve to speak unchallenged about whatever, Criticizing Rushdies books, picking apart his argument, or calling him an outright fool is as much free speech as anything, what I am talking about is outright death threats, death sentences in the form of fatwas. That, is what is indefencible, it is undemocratic, it is cruel, primitive and an insult to human intelligence to condemn people TO DEATH for writing a book or drawing cartoons or having sex with consenting adults.

People who condone and excuse these things are no better than nazi collaborators, and I am a principle opponent of capital punishment, but they do need a good smack in the face, if nothing else but to wake them up.

Having consensual unprotected sex is not the same as going around trying to get other people infected with HIV.

And a diagnosis of HIV isn't an instant death sentence and we know that progress is being made to combat HIV.

Basically I thought this ad was sensationlist.

Not worth the complexity. So what if 1% of your votes are accidental. It all averages out (though a downvote early on in the queue is a death sentence).

Can you change vote on digg? or slashdot? etc. etc.

My only suggestion might be to add AJAX to downvote button ONLY that brings up a confirmation popup that mentions "only downvote in these situations, Are you Sure?"

+1 @brendotroy

And @LadyBug, +1 @fardhad's explanation - not being masked would be their own death sentence.

If you didn't load the whole Salon article because of the stupid ad mechanism, I direct you to this:
The tribunal also had a unique sense of timing when choosing the day for Saddam's hanging. It was a slap in the face to Sunni Arabs. This weekend marks Eid al-Adha, the Holy Day of Sacrifice, on which Muslims commemorate the willingness of Abraham to sacrifice his son for God. Shiites celebrate it Sunday. Sunnis celebrate it Saturday –- and Iraqi law forbids executing the condemned on a major holiday. Hanging Saddam on Saturday was perceived by Sunni Arabs as the act of a Shiite government that had accepted the Shiite ritual calendar.

Wow - that's just plain stupid and perhaps uber-childish. Not only do you insult ~20% of your countrymen (the childish part), but you do it with a holiday ABOUT MARTYRDOM/SACRIFICE (yeah, the stupid part).

They need some Semiotics Majors in Baghdad. Now.

Among many other things, anyway.

The writer seems to agree

The timing also allowed Saddam, in his farewell address to Iraq, to pose as a “sacrifice” for his nation, an explicit reference to Eid al-Adha. The tribunal had given the old secular nationalist the chance to use religious language to play on the sympathies of the whole Iraqi public.

The political ineptitude of the tribunal, from start to finish, was astonishing. The United States and its Iraqi allies basically gave Saddam a platform on which to make himself a martyr to Iraqi unity and independence -- even if by unity and independence Saddam was really appealing to Sunnis' nostalgia for their days of hegemony.

Here's another way to look at it: was this, in the end, just another of the 500 daily deaths, or will it have lasting impact?

The egomaniac in Saddam was, I figure, no doubt be afraid of the former outcome.

BTW, welcome back deathcow, you've been quiet for a while.

This video merely highlights the ignorance of the soldiers involved and the society that has nurtured them. I am shocked and ashamed by this act. To say destroying this mans car took away his livelyhood is an understatement. In a nation such as Iraq destroyed by our suposed liberating forces and without ANY saftey net losing a taxi could well be a death sentence for that mans family. If I were in that position I am sure I would set myself on exacting revenge on an occupying force. Another example of the US fucking itself in the ass.

It's amazing to me how people can form an opinion about someone after watching about 50 seconds of video of them doing something they have probably never done before and probably shouldn't be doing. Especially without instruction.

def says "what an asshole"... maybe. Ignorant of how to handle the gun... definitely. We don't he's an asshole from the video. I'd like to see how, without any instruction, you would handle a .60 cal handgun if given the opportunity.

therealblankman says: "Fat, stupid, NRA-membering, Republican-voting, moron." Fat... definitely, the rest, is all just assumed and, your opinion. You have no way of knowing any of that.

swampgirl says: "why make a handgun that powerful? I guess I'd like to see someone w/ some strength and training shoot this instead of dumbass here"
You make a handgun that powerful because you want to and there is a market for it, no other reason necessary. This is America, where we are free to make a product as long as it's approved and legal.

noizy says: " should've pointed it the opposite direction to start with, perhaps." Just because he didn't hold the gun correctly, he is given a death sentence. Harsh, don't you think?

bamdrew says: "upon a second watch, a friend calls him a "big sissy" even before he shows just how big a sissy he is.
unnecessarily large guns is an american tradition." If you notice, he is called a sissy for needing to hold it with 2 hands. A silly remark since, if you are experienced with guns, you know you should ALWAYS use 2 hands to hold a gun. This isn't TV or movies where people shoot accurately with one hand. Guns, especially large caliber handguns, recoil. He was simply being goaded into making a foolish mistake by being called a sissy.

I know I will probably be called names here for having these opinions. It's easy to write mean and uninformed diatribes from the anonymity of your computer. This guy should not be handling a gun as he did here. Simple as that.