Welcome to Gaia! ::

Now, I've had a few discussions with Toxic about this very thing, and she's always come out making me appear to be quite the fool. That's cause she's better at phrasing things in real life than I am.

Yeah, she's better than me at something. I said it. You win, Toxic. Or do you?

Cause I think I've just stumbled upon something I wanted to share with y'all.

There was a day when toxic was speaking with me about me being anti-death penalty, and pro-choice. She said I was, and I'm paraphrasing, putting the death penalty on life that doesn't deserve it. Well, I just realized that even if it seems to conflict with being anti-death penalty, it went with the thing that I most believe in: That people don't deserve to have their lives altered to the point that it becomes something they don't want, simply for their actions in life. I believe in learning from your mistakes, and learning through things you do in life. rehabilitating someone is better than destroying their life. And if I can make this distinction for a murderer, I can certainly make it for a woman.

It's kind of like, a mistake is a mistake. No matter what it is. You don't want it, but if you can learn from it by getting yourself out of it, then more power to you.

But some governments would rather kill, than rehabilitate, so there.

...>>

I hope that made even the slightest sense.

I'll put my self-satisfaction in my pocket, cause I know there's gonna be none when Mira gets a hold of this thread. heart

To me, the death penalty is essentially using death as a punishment. And in that same breath, forcing someone to have a child that will radically change their life is punishment as well, and it a child should be a joy. Not like.. "Take your medicine. You had sex, have the kid." A birth shouldn't be the same thing as a chore.

Actions shouldn't go without consequence, but they also shouldn't go with judgement of a certain degree. And telling someone that they shouldn't have an abortion is judging them to the point where you're trying to apply your morals onto them. And I realize that you might say having an abortion is applying your morals onto someone as well, but a pregnancy that's not wanted doesn't feel like a joy, because you're making someone have a baby. That's not telling someone to take responsibility. That's putting them in a timeout.

And maybe a little selfishness is a good thing. I mean, I realize that abortion is selfish. It's all about the mother and her needs, but I don't think people need to think about others without doing anything for themselves. Sometimes a little selfishness makes that much of a difference. You can't be perfect, because if you only think of others, and how such things affect them, then you wind up with a pretty empty existence. Like in that movie, A Home at the End of the World. [/tangent]

I realize that it is a little contradictory, but it's not hypocritical. I support a person not being punished with a sentence I feel is unjust, and can radically change their life, in both instances.

Sheesh. sweatdrop

Well, going with what you say. In the case you speak of, it is a punishment to the criminal to be put to death for an action. Isn't it a punishment to the family of the victim to have to deal with that person getting away with murdering a loved one? To have to put their tax money into a system that pays to take care of this person, to have to deal with the fact that their family/friend is dead, forever, unchangeably, and the person who did this is going to sit back and get free meals, free housing, free living for the rest of his or her life, funded partially by the tax money paid by the family and friends of the victim?

Now, I really don't think death should ever be a punishment. Obviously, I don' t feel like vengeance is a good reason to allow someone to die. But you are doing comparrisons, like this. fetus-mother = criminal-society. It is perfectly acceptable to you that a mother should not have to deal with the fetus. Why is it acceptable that society should have to deal with the criminal? How is that fair?

In life, you must judge people. In this situation, a judgement must be made. Does this person become aborted/executed in order to spare the mother/society?

I'll give you a situation. Jane is addicted to drugs. Her father finds out and cuts off her money, grounds her, and forces her to go for rehab. She's over it now, but she meets a great guy and can't date him because she's grounded. Her father won't let her date him because of her past choices. If she doesn't get out of the house, she can't see this guy she's fallen in love with and it is potentially lifechanging. If she doesn't see him, she may never see him again. It'll definitely be harder, and take longer. There is no way of getting past her father, though. Is it right to shoot her father in order to get out? Why should her father hold her back due to her past mistakes?

A mistake is a mistake, and we should try and help people learn from them and overcome them. Why is it necessary to kill to do this? Are these women just incapable of overcoming this any other way? Do they need special powers from the government to allow them to kill because they're too weak to do it by themselves? I mean, I know you don't feel that way. I also know you feel a fetus is a life. When you have several options available, why sanction the one that kills before taking the other options? Why isn't the deadly one used only as a last resort?