...for Scott Peterson. I don't really care that much, except I so enjoy seeing that scumbarrel, Mark Geragos, lose.

Most countries in the EU do not have the death penalty. Oh well, remnants of a colonial penalty system.

Most countries in the EU do not have the death penalty. Oh well, remnants of a colonial penalty system.

And...wait, now...let me guess. I'm betting that you think that, in some inexplicable fashion, this makes the EU morally superior...

Anyway, we barely have a death penalty. And a baby killer will probably live longer on death row than in the general population.

Yeah, this clown isn't dying in a California prison unless he gets shanked.

Too bad Geragos didn't stay on as whas-his-name-with-the-plastic-face's lawyer. I'm thinking he'd be two for two on recent cases then.

And...wait, now...let me guess. I'm betting that you think that, in some inexplicable fashion, this makes the EU morally superior...

Yes, it most definitively does. At least on this issue. Even the Catholic Church agrees.

Human justice is imperfect, hence it is a bad idea to apply terminally irreversible sentences that either take a life or limb.

On impoverished societies without proper prison facilities or the money to run them, it could be justified using these kinds of sentences due to the emergency status. On rich and stable societies it is an anacronism.

"On impoverished societies without proper prison facilities or the money to run them, it could be justified using these kinds of sentences due to the emergency status. On rich and stable societies it is an anacronism."

So you're saying that the morality of a punishment can change based on the relative wealth of society? Because the US can afford to house prisoners, the death penalty is immoral? For Ethiopia, it would be okay?

How disappointing that you weren't raised to understand that morality is independent of financial status.

-S

What Stephen says.

But also, I'm wondering why you think I would care what the Catholic Church thinks. And in fact, I'll bet that when they disagree with you (on, say, birth control?--just guessing), you don't care what they think either, so unless you accept all of the pontiff's declarations on all issues, it's quite disingenuous to trot him out as a moral authority to support your pathetic argument.

Spare us the invidious comparisons to the saintly Europeans. One of the reasons they don't have a death penalty is that they tend not to take their worst actors alive. Perhaps you recall that nutcase in Luxembourg a few years back who took a kindergarten class hostage? The French were called in to deal with the situation. They waited until the mutt was sleeping, then put a whole magazine of 9mm parabellums into his sorry ass. Due process is as due process does.

Stephen: There is no such thing as innate rights. The rights you have were acquired after sweat and blood. Rights and morals change according to circumstances (even RAH would agree with me on this point). I know this does not go down well with some of the religious among you, but this even happens in the Bible. From the poligamic marriages in the Old Testament, required to sustain a small nation embroiled in quasi-constant war, to today's strictly monogamic marriages. The Old Testament even tolerates rape and incest under special circumstances, for much the same reasons.

Today we have many laws and rights, of these rights I consider the rights of freedom of speech and movement for all citizens as the most important. Second to these is what I call the right of all citizens to their own body. This is why I disapprove of incapacitating mutilation or death against your own will on principle. This is also why I tolerate abortion, despite it being negative for society's self-perpetuation (which should be the prime directive of any society).

How disappointing that you weren't raised to understand that morality is independent of financial status.

Sorry, but that is, not to be too polite, hooey. To nomadic Eskimos, leaving their old and infirm to die was moral and right - because dragging them along would have endangered survival of everyone else. As Gojira pointed out, for societies engaged in constant warfare polygamy was logical - and moral. In today's affluent and peaceful societies, both practices are abhorrent

Laws and morality follow the dictum of survival.

I suspect that once space colonies start making their own laws, any act which even MIGHT depressurize the entire colony would be punished by death, quite likely a prolonged and excruciating one.