|
|
Post by janet on Feb 7, 2006 13:31:10 GMT -5
The leading death penalty advocate in the Iowa Legislature, an anti-abortion Republican, says there is no conflict between his belief that life should be preserved and his desire to execute those why prey on children.
"I don't think you can be any more pro-life than to want to defend the lives of the most vulnerable of our citizens," Sen. Larry McKibben, R-Marshalltown." .. I absolutely believe this is pro-life because I'm fighting for something that will deter the deaths of these people that can't defend themselves.
McKibben has drafted a bill that would authorize the death penalty in cases in which a child is kidnapped, sexually abused, and murdered.
To avoid one issue that might give abortion foes trouble, the bill specifies that a pregnant woman sentenced to death must first give birth before the sentence is carried out.
McKibben said the bill was prompted by the slaying of 10-year old Jetseta Gage, who was abducted from her home in Cedar Rapids last spring.
A former family friend, Roger Bentley, 30, of Brandon, was sentenced to life in prison for kidnapping and murder.
A similar case, the August 1994 kidnap-slaying of 9-year-old Anna Marie Emry of Grinell, prompted the last serious death penalty debate. Larry Lane Morgan is serving a life sentence in that case.
Then-Gov. Terry Branstad, a Republican, used the case as an example of why the death sentence should be reinstated.
A bill drafted in 1997 by Sen. Andy McKean, R-Anamosa, would have restored the death penalty for those convicted of 2 serious felonies, such as a rapist who kills his victim or an inmate who kills someone while serving a life sentence. It failed to pass and was dropped the next year.
McKibbons bill likely faces the same fate.
It failed to get a hearing before the Judiciary Committee. Democratic Sens. Bob Dvorsky and Keith Kreiman said they are morally opposed to the death penalty and plan to block debate.
McKibbon said he hopes to bring it up before a subcommittee today. McKibbon, a former Sunday school teacher and a board member at a First United Mathodist Church, said he respects the opinions of those who oppose the death penalty on moral grunds of because of religious beliefs.
"I respect those opinions. I simply don't believe that's where the majority of Iowans are right now," he said.
David Ozar, a professor of philosophy at Loyola University of Chicago, said people who support capital punishment often justify their position by weighing the benefit against har.
However, he added, "some people, perhaps even child murders, might say life in prison is worse than death and so capital punishment is actually kinder."
Ozar said some would argue that opposing abortion while supporting capital punishment are contradictory; it would be difficult to explain why one considers them consistent.
Iowa repealed its death penalty in 1965, two years after the state's last execution. Victor Feguer, convicted of federal charges, was hanged at the Iowa State penitentiary in 1963 for killing a Dubuque doctor whose body was dumped in Illinois.
(source: Iowa City Press-Citizen)
|
|
|
|
Post by skyloom on Feb 7, 2006 15:05:14 GMT -5
I think a lot of opinion depends on how you view the death penalty in the first place... as a crime and punishment type of issue, or as a human rights type of issue, or from some other approach.
Pros who are also anti-abortion seem to rest their opinion on some concept of guilty life v. innocent life. Go figure...
|
|
|
|
Post by attitude on Feb 7, 2006 19:54:52 GMT -5
I think a lot of opinion depends on how you view the death penalty in the first place... as a crime and punishment type of issue, or as a human rights type of issue, or from some other approach. Pros who are also anti-abortion seem to rest their opinion on some concept of guilty life v. innocent life. Go figure... I do not any inconsistency with that view...I do not advocate the idea of summary execution, any executions should only take place after a fair trial to the defendant and a thorough review... Innocent babies are being killed because of they are an inconvenience to the mother...Murdered get killed becuase the killed someone who they saw as an inconvenience... |
|
|
|
Post by judywaits4u on Feb 8, 2006 0:32:56 GMT -5
You are either pro-life or against life. Anti-abortion, Anti-CP. Pro-Abortion, Pro-CP.
You cannot be one and not the other on the basis of morals, killing is right or killing is wrong.
People keep complaining about a foetus not having human rights, so if they did have human rights and are people, what difference does it make as to who that person is an inconvenience to? That would make abortion and CP murder.
|
|
sdl
New Arrival
Posts: 0
|
Post by sdl on Feb 8, 2006 0:38:19 GMT -5
And of course you have pro-life neo-Nazis like Randall Terry who not only support the DP, they want to expand it to doctors who perform abortions and women who have them. Terry also advocates the DP for gays (including his own son who he has publically denounced)
Then you have people like Paul Hill and his supporters. I suspect they wanted Hill to be executed so as to create a martyr for their cause.
|
|
|
|
Post by kat2 on Feb 8, 2006 13:44:43 GMT -5
I disagree very strongly Judy. I have very strong morals. I am a very good person. I believe 100% on a woman's right to choose and I am about 95% against the death penalty. I don't think that it is fair for you to say that I cannot be one without the other. A little judgemental, no?
|
|
|
|
Post by judywaits4u on Feb 8, 2006 14:15:05 GMT -5
Dear Kat,
I consider myself to be anti-abortion but I support the right of choice for other women. Abortion is a personal matter and I do not believe anybody has the right to tell a woman she can or cannot have an abortion. I also do not believe that any man has any right on abortion as far as any woman having or not having one goes. What I draw the line at is people who say that abortion is wrong because though shall not kill and then say that it does not count when it comes to the State Murdering its people. I do not think anybody who supports CP can justify being anti-abortion.
So you can be anti-abortion and for women's choice.
Love and hugs,
Judy
|
|
|
|
Post by skyloom on Feb 9, 2006 9:28:25 GMT -5
Innocent babies are being killed because of they are an inconvenience to the mother...
Cyclone, I have never known or heard about any woman who had an abortion because her pregnancy was an "inconvenience." Some women have reasons for abortion that might seen inconsequential to you or me, but neither of us lives in that woman's shoes so neither of us is in a position to judge her motives.
In addition, I suspect that many women will give "outsiders" some reason like "I don't want to spoil my figure" as their way of saying "none of your darn business." I don't blame them one bit for that. It is none of your darn business.
|
|
|
|
Post by kat2 on Feb 9, 2006 10:57:17 GMT -5
Exactly Skyloom. 100% agree with everything you just said.
|
|
|
|
Post by judywaits4u on Feb 9, 2006 13:04:03 GMT -5
Dear Sky,
Some years ago when I worked as an RN I worked on a surgical ward where the women were on when they came into my hospital for terminations. I used to get women coming in for terminations for many reasons but none of them were flippant.
I have seen some of the most hard nosed young women who were complete wrecks when nobody was around.
Men know nothing about terminations and are clueless about the women that have them.
I do not believe that an abortion would be right for me, even though I was offered one when I was expecting Katie. However I would fight until my last breathe to support a woman for the right to choose because only a woman can know whether or not an abortion is right for her.
Loe and hugs,
Judy
|
|
|
|
Post by attitude on Feb 17, 2006 0:28:08 GMT -5
Skyloom,
Abortion in Australia is my business. It is funded by Medicare (and hence it is available to all Australians)...I do believe women should have there own choice....this is also why what people do in the bedroom is not private especially if they have a high chance of picking up a STD Medicare pays for their treatment...no I am not arguing that we shouldn't pay for it, but we should be able to tell people what they are doing it wrong! I would much rather see that money being used to save lives rather then kill life
A man was sentenced to 20 years in prison for shooting a women becuase he was upset she aborted his child...the abortion affected him (mind you deliberately laying in wait to shoot someone no matter the reason deserves the DP in my opinion)
|
|
|
|
Post by judywaits4u on Feb 17, 2006 2:04:50 GMT -5
Dear Cyclone,
I agree with what you say but for different reasons.
I believe that education on sexually transmitted diseases needs to be rather blunt.
In the USA in the 60s they traced over one million cases of Gonorrhea back to one single prostitute.
40% of the population of India are apparently suffering with TB, which is very much complicated by the fact that a large percentage of those people are HIV Positive. This might be seen as a problem for the people involved alone, failing that a problem for India: However people travel and this problem is a world wide problem, look how the HIV virus crossed from Africa to the USA.
Many sexually transmitted diseases are taken for granted because treated they are fairly minor but untreated they can cause unbelievable consequences, especially if a woman so affected gets pregnant.
Love and hugs,
Judy
|
|
|
|
Post by skyloom on Feb 20, 2006 10:25:15 GMT -5
Abortion in Australia is my business. It is funded by Medicare (and hence it is available to all Australians)...I do believe women should have there own choice....this is also why what people do in the bedroom is not private especially if they have a high chance of picking up a STD Medicare pays for their treatment...no I am not arguing that we shouldn't pay for it, but we should be able to tell people what they are doing it wrong! I would much rather see that money being used to save lives rather then kill life. It sounds as if you are upset because people who have STDs or women who have abortions receive treatment on your dollar. Of course I cannot speak for Australia, but in the U.S. there are many things I pay for through my taxes that I feel are far less worthy than medical care. It upsets me that I'm paying for this senseless massacre in Iraq... it upsets me that I'm paying for capital punishments to be carried out... it upsets me that I'm paying for the destruction of wilderness areas in this nation so that a few corporations can post higher profits for their investors. It seems that there is a surplus of powerlessness these days... at least in the U.S. So, if a few women are actually able to take charge of one small area of their lives, even if they do it on my dollar, more power to them. I'm confident that they are making their choices with more honesty than the current government is doing. |
|
|
|
Post by nessynou on Feb 21, 2006 5:26:40 GMT -5
Cyclone,
I being an Australian female myself and I have been in a position where my ex partner wanted me to abort our child. I now have a beautiful six year old, as I myself could not have an abortion. However I have a very good friend that was very badly sexually assaulted and decided to go and have the pregnancy terminated. I do believe that she had the right to have her termination paid for by medicare. Some woman definitely are not considering the child to be an inconvenience but a way to save themselves from the hell that they have already had to endure. My friend had this done because as she said "Every time I am going to look at this child I am going to think of what 'he' did to me and that is not fair myself or the child." Just one reason why some women do have abortions.
|
|
|
|
Post by judywaits4u on Feb 21, 2006 12:51:36 GMT -5
Dear Nessynou,
The right to have a pregnancy terminated should be a right for evey woman around the world and I see no reason why this should not be paid for by the state. I have to admit however that I would never of had one myself.
I do believe that sex education should be very prominent and it is the responsibility of the state to pay for sex education and for the treatment of sexually transmitted diseases. What nobody has any right to presume is that any individual is guilty of anything.
Love and hugs,
Judy
|
|
