"The death penalty is not a proportional punishment for the rape of a child"

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Wrong, and SU is wrong about what he said too. My moral opinion on the death penalty aside, the majority laid out a very weak case for why it violates the 8th amendment.

That isn't wrong, you DID say just that. Are you now denying that you would prefer a conservative result to a strict constructionist result? If you are, you are either lying or you have flipped.

Whether or not the majority gave the best arguments for its opinion is, as you noted, of secondary importance. I haven't heard a compelling reason from you as to why the death penalty needs to be extended in these kinds of cases. I think you will also quickly find that vengeance is the primary motivator in these cases, rather than justice, for most people. Of the people in this thread, for example, who support your position, you are the only one so far who hasn't argued that the perpetrator should be treated brutally.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

No, I feel no reason to justify my position to you, as you are a bleeding heart liberal and I'm not and nothing either of us could say will change the other's point of view.

Just accept that and move on.

Fine- then don't respond to my posts and save us the time. I am willing to talk about the issue. You don't appear to be.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Cruel and unusual is subjecting oneself to Cali Coug's trademarked Death-By-Hen-Pecking.

A swing and a miss. A quick Google search may have found a good home for your super-witty Tex humor.

http://michelle.snafu.org/punish.htm

They even say "heh" a lot. You will fit right in.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Again, is life in prison devoid of justice or somehow less just than the death penalty? It would have to be for the death penalty to be preferable if deterrence is not of primary importance.

Depends on the crime. In this particular situation, my opinion is the most just punishment is forfeiture of life. The legislatures of 6 states agree, which means the legislatures of 44 don't (or haven't taken up the issue).

IOW, it's a judgment call. Which is why the call should be left up to the people and not 5 justices.

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

And read the majority of the 5 justices.

Hey, YOU asked. Idiot.

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

That isn't wrong, you DID say just that. Are you now denying that you would prefer a conservative result to a strict constructionist result? If you are, you are either lying or you have flipped.

Of the two of us, I am not the liar.

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Whether or not the majority gave the best arguments for its opinion is, as you noted, of secondary importance. I haven't heard a compelling reason from you as to why the death penalty needs to be extended in these kinds of cases. I think you will also quickly find that vengeance is the primary motivator in these cases, rather than justice, for most people. Of the people in this thread, for example, who support your position, you are the only one so far who hasn't argued that the perpetrator should be treated brutally.

Yes, this thread is an excellent cross-section of America. Nice polling job there.

I gave you my "compelling reason" already. Not my fault if you don't read.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Depends on the crime. In this particular situation, my opinion is the most just punishment is forfeiture of life. The legislatures of 6 states agree, which means the legislatures of 44 don't (or haven't taken up the issue).

IOW, it's a judgment call. Which is why the call should be left up to the people and not 5 justices.

So 6 out of 50 say it is ok? Sounds, what's the word... unusual?

I did, you moron. YOU asked.

Teach me to ask. I should know better by now than to expect a productive response.

Of the two of us, I am not the liar.

Now that's just a lie.

Yes, this thread is an excellent cross-section of America. Nice polling job there.

I gave you my "compelling reason" already. Not my fault if you don't read.

Maybe we should just go to the number of states who think the death penalty is appropriate and compare it to the number who think it isn't. I wonder what that would come out to be.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

So 6 out of 50 say it is ok? Sounds, what's the word... unusual?

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Maybe we should just go to the number of states who think the death penalty is appropriate and compare it to the number who think it isn't. I wonder what that would come out to be.

I don't agree that the court should simply follow public opinion, but I've duly noted that you do.

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Fine- then don't respond to my posts and save us the time. I am willing to talk about the issue. You don't appear to be.

You're willing to claim that you're right and I'm wrong. That isn't being willing to talk about it.

I stated my opinion and you didn't like it. Had you just commented that you disagree with my opinion, the discussion would have been over, but you decided to go a step further and say that people who are for the death penalty for a child rapist are all about vengeance. You decided to make it an "I'm right and you're wrong" discussion.

[UtahDan]

The problem with this discussion IMO is that the 8th Amendment is maybe the worst area you could pick to have an originalist vs. activist debate over. This because 8th Amendment jurisprudence rests largely on looking at what the states are doing to determine what the national consensus is as to cruel and unusual. This is actually one area where the SCOTUS should have its finger to the wind so to speak.

This is not like 5th amendment jurisprudence in, for example, Roe or Lawrence where brand new rights that no one knew about for 200 years sprang fully formed from the ether (or what they liked to call the penumbra). In those cases the jurists were consciously saying "yes, we know that the founders had a completely different idea about what this piece of the constitution says, but thats okay because we think that it says what ever we say it says, not necessarily what they meant."

I actually think the Supremes got this one right, but if they didn't I don't think the best attack is on originalist grounds.

[Taq Man]

Originally Posted by Tex

So says Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy in yet another 5-4 decision.

It's hard for me not to just be thoroughly disgusted with that statement.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080625/..._co/scotus_rdp

I have to agree with Tex here. If you had ever seen what happens to a young girl/boy when they are raped by an adult you would too.

I have seen several cases and I can tell you that it is impossible for an adult to penetrate a young child without severe damage taking place. Almost without exception the girls are scarred for life. They will never have kids and they have vaginal/uteral problems the rest of the way. Many times the assault results in death.

This actually happened in Salt lake City a few years back. Illegal Alien (Police think) breaks a window steals a three year old out of her bed and rapes her outside the home. A neighbor wakes from the screaming and the perp runs. The 3 year old died from the injuries.

How can you argue this man does not deserve to die wether the girl died from the injuries or not?

The act of penetrating a child is grounds for execution.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Taq Man

I have to agree with Tex here. If you had ever seen what happens to a young girl/boy when they are raped by an adult you would too.

I have seen several cases and I can tell you that it is impossible for an adult to penetrate a young child without severe damage taking place. Almost without exception the girls are scarred for life. They will never have kids and they have vaginal/uteral problems the rest of the way. Many times the assault results in death.

This actually happened in Salt lake City a few years back. Illegal Alien (Police think) breaks a window steals a three year old out of her bed and rapes her outside the home. A neighbor wakes from the screaming and the perp runs. The 3 year old died from the injuries.

How can you argue this man does not deserve to die wether the girl died from the injuries or not?

The act of penetrating a child is grounds for execution.

but not an adult?