to talk about mother and fetus as being two separate entities before a birth is absurd...they are connected. The fetus is part of the mother, literally. An egg in her womb is a "potential life", but is menstration a crime? A man's sperm is many "potential lives", but is masturbation illegal?
let's say I have a rare blood disorder and only a constant 24 hour a day, seven days a week for nine month transfusion from you will save me. Do I have the right to make you give me that transfusion? And if you don't, did you murder me?
According to the state, a person isn't a person until it has a birth certificate...so why does the state have any say in saying a fetus is a person? Will I qualify for social security nine months before the date? Could I legally drink at age 20 and 3 months?
Besides, I can't have one, so any law concerning it would discrimate against women since it cannot apply to men.
If you have ever known a woman who had one, you would know that nobody WANTS one...sometimes life gives you a no win decision, and that kind of decision should be left up to the person who has to make it.
Sometimes people have a limb amputated, do you say that they are for amputation? Of course not.
If you want to fill every available square inch of space on your license plate, door panels and fenders with anti-abortion messages I don't care. I'm not the kind of person who puts moral messages on car bumpers. But you paid for the steel and rubber: say whatever you want on it.
All I'm saying is be intellectually honest, and don't try to convince me you're saying somthing you're not.
Not to consider the idea at all is absurd and closed minded, in your case probably intentionally so.
to consider tht they are separate when they obviously are not is absurd and close-minded? nonsense.
The point life begins is conception
life doesn't "begin", it changes. sperm are alive, ovum are alive. this too is obvious.
Neither the egg or the sperm are "potential lives."
of COURSE they are.
just as "potential life" requires things, just as a fetus requires it's mother, these things require each other to grow.
You analogy is not comparable. Only a fool would even suggest it.
the analogy of requiring a blood transfusion isn't comparable to a fetus requiring it's mother isn't comparable? of course it is. calling me a name isn't going to change that. try explaining why instead.
Just because the state does or does not recognize something doesn't change any reality
that's right, the fact that the state doesn't consider it a person doesn't change the reality that the state has no jurisdiction over it as a person. It's not, according to the state, a person...therefor, the state cannot treat it like a person. that's what we are taking about, isn't it...the state making a law about it?
Until the government raises both limits. The argument is top level ignorance.
that wasn't the argument, that was an example that supports the argument. again, calling me a name isn't going to change that.
More utter stupidity. No it isn't discrimination simply because biology is different. Are you really a MORON or only pretending to be?
you know, people used to say that about laws concerning blacks too. and again, the namecalling isn't making any point.
That is your opinion and it doesn't take into account that a new life has begun. It is the same old thing of "I want to do what I want to do and damn everyone else."
a new life has begun?
no, a fetus has been formed by the combining of two things that are also alive. as for "doing what you want to do and damn everyone else", what if I decided that your sperm are potential life and wanted to make a law that you could not masterbate or ejaculate without being in the process of trying to get your sperm to combine with an egg? I could just as easily say that your killing those "potential life" sperms is just an example of you wanting to do what you want to do and damn everyone else.
save the sperm...stop the bleeding!
why don't you just keep the fuck out of the uteruses of women you don't know and leave it at that?
Yes, "Choose life" is a term favored by the pro life groups, but the term does not belong to them exclusively. It is a positive multi level phrase that can touch so many, why not just leave it alone.
Some people might not even know it is a term associated with the pro-life movement.
My license plate has University of Florida on it which we paid extra for.
I support the right for any person of any state to be able to pay for a license plate with such a positive message as "Choose Life".
Florida has choose life license plates after winning a similiar battle and they are tasteful. I believe the monies from the license plates are used to promote adoption.
Did anyone watch the MTV movie Saturday night "Everybody's Doing It"?
They followed the movie with a 30 minute special "fight-rights" stating that congress is having heated debates about which types of sex ed programs will be taught in school to our youths. The show encouraged youths to fight for their rights of sex ed programs in their schools and not abstinence only programs.
I found both the movie and the following special interesting. The special gave air time to the abstinence only movement and one of the educators promoting abstinence only gave a statement that stuck with me. She said "if your kids are thinking about smoking, you wouldn't say to them I don't want you to smoke... but if you do... here's a filter". She believed very strongly that abstinence only was the way to go. Evidently there is a movement of abstinence only classes that are not religious based and these classes are growing across the U.S.
I do not think they emphasized clearly enough that condoms and other forms of birth control DO NOT protect against many STD's.
They did make a point in the 30 minute special that both teaching methods agree that the only way to guarantee 100% against STD's and pregnancy is to abstain from sex (vaginal, anal, oral, etc).
I would be interested to know what you all think of the movie and following segment. If you get a chance, please watch it. Be back soon to check for responses.
They are separate and developing seperately. The two lives are not the same and never will be.
okay, then just cut the fetus' umbilical and let it live separately.
The difference is, non-thinking boy, that some are cells and some are HUMAN BEINGS.
yes...when you are born, you become a human being. Before that, it's a fetus. that's why there is another word for it. Again, the name-calling does nothing to advance any argument you think you may have.
Of course, they ARE NOT. Those cells will be nothing but those cells. Once the egg is fertilized a human being begins to grow.
no, a fetus begins to grow, a fetus that is part of the mother.
Everyone requires someone else to survive.
and sperm require an egg.
Because I have no responsibility to treat you for your illness.
it's not a question of "treating" me, it's a matter of letting me die.
Now if the mother decided not to feed the unborn child then maybe you could have something comparable, but I doubt it.
cut the cord is okay? Great, that's what an abortion is doing.
The government can have jurisdiction if it so chooses
for the government to take jurisdiction of something connected to a woman's body, to me, is morally abhorrant. It's not unlike slavery. People have a right to their bodies, and as long as there is an umbilical cord, it's a part of the mother's body.
We are talking about morals
Indeed, to tell someone what they can and cannot do with their body isn't moral.
I call your statements ignorant and they are. I am not going to say wow what a thought. If it is stupid it should be called stupid.
no, you aren't calling the statements anything, you are calling names. If you think a statement is stupid, explain WHY it's stupid. See, I think your seeing what I'm saying is stupid as being ignorant, I will explain why seeing it as stupid in'st intelligent, but I won't call you a dumbass. Keep calling me names and I won't extend this courtesy much longer.
Tell me, what is the different biology between whites and blacks?
well, right off the top of my head I'd say levels of seratonin in the organ known as the skin, for starters. Levels of succeptability to sicle cell anemia perhaps? It's a dumb argument, which was my point.
An unborn child, if not dismembered will be a born child in most instances
tell me about all those 3 month old fetuses who survive being removed from the womb.
if you want to find a way to remove a fetus and keep it alive and care for it, go for it. Oh yea...it's not your's to do that with, is it?
Yes and if butchers and probutchery people like you will let the child live you would see that.
I'm not advocating killing children. I'm advocating allowing women to decide what to do with their fetus in their body. (key word "their)
I'm not in favor of forcing abortion on women any more than I'm in favor of forcing them to do something with THEIR bodies.
It's not a case of "letting", it's a case of "forcing". I want to let, you want to force.
Your premise [your sperm are potential life] is not supported by any fact. An unborn child, if not dismembered will be a born child in most instances
an unborn sperm will not survive unless you combine it with an unborn egg. that's a fact. Should I force you to at least TRY to put your sperm together with an egg in order to preserve it's life? It's a potential human being after all.
You want to equate the unborn life and the individual cells both as potential life. Your analogy is unsupported by the facts: the unborn child is life.
by that logic, so is a sperm.
let's see an unborn child (they are called fetuses) do anything but die without being connected to the body of a mother. just as the sperm will do nothing but die without it's egg. for life, they require each other. Now, since the potenial human being that is your sperm requires an egg to live, can I force you to make sure that sperm gets and stays together with an egg?
If the women don't get pregnant I couldn't care less about their uteruses.
then don't get anyone pregnant.
but the fact is, if you want to control the fetus, you want to control the body of the mother.
The choice you support, crabs, is allowing a woman to butcher the unborn child on a whim.
the "unborn child" (the term is fetus) is a part of the woman's body. Since I have no rights to that body, the idea of "allowing" doesn't even enter the picture. I have to have a right to disallow in order to "allow", and I don't have that right in regards to a mother's body.
And in that respect, just as some would not just stand by and be silent while a mother/father abuses their own child, some will not be silent when a child is ripped to shreds and sucked out of a person or equally as horrid, baby has their brains sucked out and is left on a cold hard metal table to writhe in pain and slowly die.
Some of us have serious concerns with this behavior.
Some people view abortion as the ultimate form of child abuse
it's not a child yet.
if they want to consider their fetus a child, fine. I'm not gonna force anyone to have an abortion.
some will not be silent when a child is ripped to shreds and sucked out of a person or equally as horrid, baby has their brains sucked out and is left on a cold hard metal table to writhe in pain and slowly die.
then support the right of a woman to make the decision early enough so it's not as ugly as all that.
It's not pretty or something people want. It's a decision that has no easy answers. But forcing a woman to do something with her body isn't the answer.
You ratchet up the rhetoric fast when you get your back up, don't you Paula?
That's what his wrong with both sides the abortion debate. Once the words start flying the space between extreme talk and extreme action gets narrower and narrower.
You ought to think before you say something sometimes.
The process started long before the birth day.Before that, it's a fetus. Semantics. Something butchers like to hide behind.that's why there is another word for it. Again, the name-calling does nothing to advance any argument you think you may have. This is a war wicked boy, make no mistake.
That's what his wrong with both sides the abortion debate. Once the words start flying the space between extreme talk and extreme action gets narrower and narrower.
Well if wasn't about life and death on one side and pure selfishness on the other it might not be so contentious.
I don't value all life the same. I believe murderers should be executed
You know, I'm old enough to remember when abortion was against the law...guess what, women still had abortions, only they risked their own lives to do it.
Now, if I understand you correctly, you are saying that you want to execute every woman who has ever had an abortion.
You know, I'm old enough to remember when abortion was against the law...guess what, women still had abortions, only they risked their own lives to do it. It is called CHOICE.
Now, if I understand you correctly, you are saying that you want to execute every woman who has ever had an abortion.
that's your position, right? Did I say that? Prison would be enough for the women. Maybe the abortionists should face the death penalty.
Did I say that? Prison would be enough for the women. Maybe the abortionists should face the death penalty.
yes, you did say that.
I believe murderers should be executed.
now, it's the women who decide to have the abortion.
Just because you hire someone to murder for you doesn't mean that you aren't guilty of the murder.
tell me bodine, how much effort have you made in providing women birth control? how much sex education have you provided kids so they don't get pregnant? what have YOU done to prevent an abortion before it was considered?
put your money where your mouth is.
work to stop unwanted pregnancy.
if you think it's a person being killed, try to figure out a way so no woman will ever have to consider what to do about an unwanted pregnanacy. Go buy a teen some birth control.
It sounds like you are trying to make me feel bad for speaking about what actually happens to the child in an abortion situation.
I did think before I spoke. I think it is just horrid to picture such a thing in your mind as a fully formed child which is growing and developing to be ripped piece by piece the way you chop up a whole chicken for dinner. Once you have pictured such a horrid thing, surely you can come up with a better solution for the growing child than barbaric and torturous means to end a life.
work hard to make sure women have easy access to safe birth control
Safe birth control? The only safe birth control is to abstain from sex, this abstinance has the positive side effect of knowing you do have self control.
Nope. I support life from conception to natural death.
Self defense when there is an eminent threat on life is the exception which includes acts of justifiable war and the right of the state to carry out the death penalty (after DNA testing proves guilt).
Self defense when there is an eminent threat on life is the exception which includes acts of justifiable war and the right of the state to carry out the death penalty (after DNA testing proves guilt).
if the murderer is locked up and the key thrown away, what is the eminent threat on life that would justify death?
Good question, and if all the states were to abolish the death penalty, I would not object. But, I do at this time support the right of each state to use the death penalty if they so choose.
I used to be against the death penalty. The past few years I have waivered on the issue and have come to the belief that you have to pay your price on earth for your crimes and sometimes that price means your life. The price has to be enough of a deterrent so that it may dissuade some of the bad guys from committing such a horrid crime as murder, serial murder, etc.
It's so reassuring when we deceive ourselves into believing that it's others that have all the bad traits we know ourselves to possess.
It's so reassuring when we deceive ourselves into believing that it's others that have all the bad traits we know ourselves to possess.
I am sure that YOU know all about that, Chesty.
I'm not leaving myself out of that ubiquitous tendency. Are you?
Why shouldn't I?
non sequitur? you amazing me, fold. every time I think you have revealed the depths of your ignorance, you sink even lower.
I fail to see how you could have possibly misinterpreted what I meant. I guess I am just giving you too much credit for intelligence.
You prove my point, Jethro. And your recent foray into our thread was yet another example.
to talk about mother and fetus as being two separate entities before a birth is absurd...they are connected. The fetus is part of the mother, literally. An egg in her womb is a "potential life", but is menstration a crime? A man's sperm is many "potential lives", but is masturbation illegal?
let's say I have a rare blood disorder and only a constant 24 hour a day, seven days a week for nine month transfusion from you will save me. Do I have the right to make you give me that transfusion? And if you don't, did you murder me?
According to the state, a person isn't a person until it has a birth certificate...so why does the state have any say in saying a fetus is a person? Will I qualify for social security nine months before the date? Could I legally drink at age 20 and 3 months?
Besides, I can't have one, so any law concerning it would discrimate against women since it cannot apply to men.
If you have ever known a woman who had one, you would know that nobody WANTS one...sometimes life gives you a no win decision, and that kind of decision should be left up to the person who has to make it.
Sometimes people have a limb amputated, do you say that they are for amputation? Of course not.
You analogy is not comparable. Only a fool would even suggest it.
Choose life could be a word of encouragement to a depressed driver at their wits end.
Choose life could be a message to begin anew for an alcoholic.
Choose life could be just the message an abused spouse needed to get out of her dangerous situation.
Choose life could spark a change for a drug abusers miserable life.
and Choose life could help that confused girl go with her first instinct and face her difficult situation.
Why do people have to ruin a good thing?
But that's not the message on the license plates, Paula, and you know it.
Well yes it is Rick. And you know it.
If you want to fill every available square inch of space on your license plate, door panels and fenders with anti-abortion messages I don't care. I'm not the kind of person who puts moral messages on car bumpers. But you paid for the steel and rubber: say whatever you want on it.
All I'm saying is be intellectually honest, and don't try to convince me you're saying somthing you're not.
to consider tht they are separate when they obviously are not is absurd and close-minded? nonsense.
life doesn't "begin", it changes. sperm are alive, ovum are alive. this too is obvious.
of COURSE they are.
just as "potential life" requires things, just as a fetus requires it's mother, these things require each other to grow.
the analogy of requiring a blood transfusion isn't comparable to a fetus requiring it's mother isn't comparable? of course it is. calling me a name isn't going to change that. try explaining why instead.
that's right, the fact that the state doesn't consider it a person doesn't change the reality that the state has no jurisdiction over it as a person. It's not, according to the state, a person...therefor, the state cannot treat it like a person. that's what we are taking about, isn't it...the state making a law about it?
that wasn't the argument, that was an example that supports the argument. again, calling me a name isn't going to change that.
you know, people used to say that about laws concerning blacks too. and again, the namecalling isn't making any point.
a new life has begun?
no, a fetus has been formed by the combining of two things that are also alive. as for "doing what you want to do and damn everyone else", what if I decided that your sperm are potential life and wanted to make a law that you could not masterbate or ejaculate without being in the process of trying to get your sperm to combine with an egg? I could just as easily say that your killing those "potential life" sperms is just an example of you wanting to do what you want to do and damn everyone else.
save the sperm...stop the bleeding!
why don't you just keep the fuck out of the uteruses of women you don't know and leave it at that?
What is the mixed messages? Don't you pay for your license plates? I do.
of course, it's a pro-choice statement.
the funny thing is, the people who use it as a slogan have no interest in allowing someone a choice.
Argue about it with Crabgrass jethro.
Either you're too ornery or you're too stupid to take up my time.
Take your pick.
Yes, "Choose life" is a term favored by the pro life groups, but the term does not belong to them exclusively. It is a positive multi level phrase that can touch so many, why not just leave it alone.
Some people might not even know it is a term associated with the pro-life movement.
Rick 1/5/03 6:13pm
I do not have even one bumper sticker on my SUV.
My license plate has University of Florida on it which we paid extra for.
I support the right for any person of any state to be able to pay for a license plate with such a positive message as "Choose Life".
Florida has choose life license plates after winning a similiar battle and they are tasteful. I believe the monies from the license plates are used to promote adoption.
The difference is, non-thinking boy, that some are cells and some are HUMAN BEINGS.
the funny thing is, the people who use it as a slogan have no interest in allowing someone a choice.
The choice you support, crabs, is allowing a woman to butcher the unborn child on a whim.
Come on, Rick, you be honest.
Did anyone watch the MTV movie Saturday night "Everybody's Doing It"?
They followed the movie with a 30 minute special "fight-rights" stating that congress is having heated debates about which types of sex ed programs will be taught in school to our youths. The show encouraged youths to fight for their rights of sex ed programs in their schools and not abstinence only programs.
I found both the movie and the following special interesting. The special gave air time to the abstinence only movement and one of the educators promoting abstinence only gave a statement that stuck with me. She said "if your kids are thinking about smoking, you wouldn't say to them I don't want you to smoke... but if you do... here's a filter". She believed very strongly that abstinence only was the way to go. Evidently there is a movement of abstinence only classes that are not religious based and these classes are growing across the U.S.
I do not think they emphasized clearly enough that condoms and other forms of birth control DO NOT protect against many STD's.
They did make a point in the 30 minute special that both teaching methods agree that the only way to guarantee 100% against STD's and pregnancy is to abstain from sex (vaginal, anal, oral, etc).
I would be interested to know what you all think of the movie and following segment. If you get a chance, please watch it. Be back soon to check for responses.
Bye! Take care!
BTW - Happy New Year!!!
okay, then just cut the fetus' umbilical and let it live separately.
yes...when you are born, you become a human being. Before that, it's a fetus. that's why there is another word for it. Again, the name-calling does nothing to advance any argument you think you may have.
no, a fetus begins to grow, a fetus that is part of the mother.
and sperm require an egg.
it's not a question of "treating" me, it's a matter of letting me die.
cut the cord is okay? Great, that's what an abortion is doing.
for the government to take jurisdiction of something connected to a woman's body, to me, is morally abhorrant. It's not unlike slavery. People have a right to their bodies, and as long as there is an umbilical cord, it's a part of the mother's body.
Indeed, to tell someone what they can and cannot do with their body isn't moral.
no, you aren't calling the statements anything, you are calling names. If you think a statement is stupid, explain WHY it's stupid. See, I think your seeing what I'm saying is stupid as being ignorant, I will explain why seeing it as stupid in'st intelligent, but I won't call you a dumbass. Keep calling me names and I won't extend this courtesy much longer.
well, right off the top of my head I'd say levels of seratonin in the organ known as the skin, for starters. Levels of succeptability to sicle cell anemia perhaps? It's a dumb argument, which was my point.
tell me about all those 3 month old fetuses who survive being removed from the womb.
if you want to find a way to remove a fetus and keep it alive and care for it, go for it. Oh yea...it's not your's to do that with, is it?
I'm not advocating killing children. I'm advocating allowing women to decide what to do with their fetus in their body. (key word "their)
I'm not in favor of forcing abortion on women any more than I'm in favor of forcing them to do something with THEIR bodies.
It's not a case of "letting", it's a case of "forcing". I want to let, you want to force.
an unborn sperm will not survive unless you combine it with an unborn egg. that's a fact. Should I force you to at least TRY to put your sperm together with an egg in order to preserve it's life? It's a potential human being after all.
by that logic, so is a sperm.
let's see an unborn child (they are called fetuses) do anything but die without being connected to the body of a mother. just as the sperm will do nothing but die without it's egg. for life, they require each other. Now, since the potenial human being that is your sperm requires an egg to live, can I force you to make sure that sperm gets and stays together with an egg?
then don't get anyone pregnant.
but the fact is, if you want to control the fetus, you want to control the body of the mother.
the "unborn child" (the term is fetus) is a part of the woman's body. Since I have no rights to that body, the idea of "allowing" doesn't even enter the picture. I have to have a right to disallow in order to "allow", and I don't have that right in regards to a mother's body.
crabgrass 1/5/03 7:14pm
Some people view abortion as the ultimate form of child abuse.
And in that respect, just as some would not just stand by and be silent while a mother/father abuses their own child, some will not be silent when a child is ripped to shreds and sucked out of a person or equally as horrid, baby has their brains sucked out and is left on a cold hard metal table to writhe in pain and slowly die.
Some of us have serious concerns with this behavior.
it's not a child yet.
if they want to consider their fetus a child, fine. I'm not gonna force anyone to have an abortion.
then support the right of a woman to make the decision early enough so it's not as ugly as all that.
It's not pretty or something people want. It's a decision that has no easy answers. But forcing a woman to do something with her body isn't the answer.
You ratchet up the rhetoric fast when you get your back up, don't you Paula?
That's what his wrong with both sides the abortion debate. Once the words start flying the space between extreme talk and extreme action gets narrower and narrower.
You ought to think before you say something sometimes.
work hard to make sure women have easy access to safe birth control
be proactive instead of reactive
so, they are for having a choice?
swell
The process started long before the birth day.Before that, it's a fetus. Semantics. Something butchers like to hide behind.that's why there is another word for it. Again, the name-calling does nothing to advance any argument you think you may have. This is a war wicked boy, make no mistake.
a war?
so, you want to kill people
now, where does that leave your position?
nowhere, that's where.
of course the do, they become part of a fetus.
really, the name calling is making you look really bad.
That's what his wrong with both sides the abortion debate. Once the words start flying the space between extreme talk and extreme action gets narrower and narrower.
Well if wasn't about life and death on one side and pure selfishness on the other it might not be so contentious.
so, you want to kill people No. But killing seems okay to you.
now, where does that leave your position?
nowhere, that's where.
I don't value all life the same. I believe murderers should be executed. Moral relativist can't see the distintions.
of course the do, they become part of a fetus. The original cells do not survive.
really, the name calling is making you look really bad. Your immorality makes you look bad. But then you wouldn't know it.
and yet...
You know, I'm old enough to remember when abortion was against the law...guess what, women still had abortions, only they risked their own lives to do it.
Now, if I understand you correctly, you are saying that you want to execute every woman who has ever had an abortion.
that's your position, right?
really, try taking a biology 101 course.
You know, I'm old enough to remember when abortion was against the law...guess what, women still had abortions, only they risked their own lives to do it. It is called CHOICE.
Now, if I understand you correctly, you are saying that you want to execute every woman who has ever had an abortion.
that's your position, right? Did I say that? Prison would be enough for the women. Maybe the abortionists should face the death penalty.
yes, you did say that.
now, it's the women who decide to have the abortion.
Just because you hire someone to murder for you doesn't mean that you aren't guilty of the murder.
tell me bodine, how much effort have you made in providing women birth control? how much sex education have you provided kids so they don't get pregnant? what have YOU done to prevent an abortion before it was considered?
put your money where your mouth is.
work to stop unwanted pregnancy.
if you think it's a person being killed, try to figure out a way so no woman will ever have to consider what to do about an unwanted pregnanacy. Go buy a teen some birth control.
Rick 1/5/03 7:30pm
It sounds like you are trying to make me feel bad for speaking about what actually happens to the child in an abortion situation.
I did think before I spoke. I think it is just horrid to picture such a thing in your mind as a fully formed child which is growing and developing to be ripped piece by piece the way you chop up a whole chicken for dinner. Once you have pictured such a horrid thing, surely you can come up with a better solution for the growing child than barbaric and torturous means to end a life.
so, I assume you are for euthanasia
crabgrass 1/5/03 7:32pm
Safe birth control? The only safe birth control is to abstain from sex, this abstinance has the positive side effect of knowing you do have self control.
Isn't abortion a reactive response?
'Bill - Fold' 1/6/03 6:44am
I cannot believe you of all people are saying that!
Sometimes I think you are both Jethro and Bill and argue to keep things going.
Sometimes I think you are both Jethro and Bill and argue to keep things going.
that's not an original thought, paula :)
crabgrass 1/6/03 9:58am
Nope. I support life from conception to natural death.
Self defense when there is an eminent threat on life is the exception which includes acts of justifiable war and the right of the state to carry out the death penalty (after DNA testing proves guilt).
ares 1/6/03 10:04am
Sorry, who else has had the same suspicion?
Sorry, who else has had the same suspicion?
mighta been me :)
Self defense when there is an eminent threat on life is the exception which includes acts of justifiable war and the right of the state to carry out the death penalty (after DNA testing proves guilt).
if the murderer is locked up and the key thrown away, what is the eminent threat on life that would justify death?
I take it you aren't familiar with how "barbaric and torturous" the "natural" end of some lives actually can be.
ares 1/6/03 10:11am
Good question, and if all the states were to abolish the death penalty, I would not object. But, I do at this time support the right of each state to use the death penalty if they so choose.
I used to be against the death penalty. The past few years I have waivered on the issue and have come to the belief that you have to pay your price on earth for your crimes and sometimes that price means your life. The price has to be enough of a deterrent so that it may dissuade some of the bad guys from committing such a horrid crime as murder, serial murder, etc.