If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(KnoxNews)   A poorly conceived Tennessee law is likely to lead to the miscarriage of justice   (knoxnews.com) divider line 385
    More: Asinine, miscarriage of justice, Bill Haslam, embryos  
•       •       •

26077 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Apr 2012 at 1:27 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



385 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-04-25 10:34:47 AM  

CapnBlues: meanmutton: 2) The law explicitly states that the only time that a murder can be charged is if a pregnant woman who wants to carry her child to term is attacked in such a way that her wanted child is killed.

now an interesting what-if here -- suppose some guy killed a woman who was pregnant. The state claims it's double homicide, but the defense claims that the child was going to be aborted. How does anyone know the true intentions of the mother about whether she was going to carry it to term?


What, you think that women decide to get abortions and then choose to wander around on the streets for a few months before they are done?
 
2012-04-25 10:34:53 AM  

Car_Ramrod: Rep. Joshua Evans, R-Greenbrier, the House sponsor, said district attorneys general would not bring charges "if the proof wasn't there" of an intent to cause harm to the embryo or fetus.

I like their "just take our word for it" approach to lawmaking. Very professional.

Evans also said the bill merely clarifies current law, which is necessary because women are sometimes attacked because of a their pregnancy.

"There is a problem with people being killed because they're pregnant, or being assaulted," he said.

Wut? There is? I have never heard of such a trend.


Statistically, newly pregnant women are more likely die by homicide than any other cause. Many states are now requiring the pregnancy status of women on death certificates to track this data. There are preliminary studies that suggest that pregnant women are many times more likely to be murdered by their spouse/boyfriend than non-pregnant women.
 
2012-04-25 10:35:36 AM  

meanmutton: So we have a law that says when a woman who is, say, 5 months pregnant with a wanted baby is assaulted by her husband or boyfriend and loses the baby we can now lock him up for a long time and somehow that's a bad thing?


i would think an extended sentence for that level of assault and battery would be a good idea regardless of the presence of a fetus.
 
2012-04-25 10:35:59 AM  
So this means pregnant women can legally drive in those HOV lanes, right?
 
2012-04-25 10:36:12 AM  

meanmutton: CapnBlues: meanmutton: 2) The law explicitly states that the only time that a murder can be charged is if a pregnant woman who wants to carry her child to term is attacked in such a way that her wanted child is killed.

now an interesting what-if here -- suppose some guy killed a woman who was pregnant. The state claims it's double homicide, but the defense claims that the child was going to be aborted. How does anyone know the true intentions of the mother about whether she was going to carry it to term?

What, you think that women decide to get abortions and then choose to wander around on the streets for a few months before they are done?


I don't know, but don't you think it's an interesting question?
 
2012-04-25 10:37:44 AM  

meanmutton: Fart_Machine: meanmutton: The fiction page. The "pro-lifers secretly getting abortions" thing is overwhelmingly a fantasy.

Citation needed.

meanmutton: It's not about protecting the innocent, it's about protecting the right of women to choose to have a child.

Wat?

1) Yes, a citation alleging that there is a wealth of pro-lifers secretly getting abortions is needed.
2) The law explicitly states that the only time that a murder can be charged is if a pregnant woman who wants to carry her child to term is attacked in such a way that her wanted child is killed.


1) America is more pro-life than other industrialized countries

2) America has more abortions than other industrialized countries

What does that tell you?
 
2012-04-25 10:38:07 AM  

Persnickety: So this means pregnant women can legally drive in those HOV lanes, right?


false. what's the biatch doing out of the kitchen?
 
2012-04-25 10:39:12 AM  

Serious Black: sprawl15: Serious Black: You could always try Fidesz in Hungary. I hear they're pretty progressive.

Orbán's a dick.

Did you see the interview he gave to Lally Weymouth earlier this month? I thought it was absolutely hilarious. Seeing him try to defend his party only writing constitutional laws when they had amended the previous constitution several times, then completely rewrote the constitution, and then amended that new constitution before it was even in power gave me uncontrollable giggles.


The very idea of 'media boards' makes me shudder.
 
2012-04-25 10:39:37 AM  

CapnBlues: meanmutton: So we have a law that says when a woman who is, say, 5 months pregnant with a wanted baby is assaulted by her husband or boyfriend and loses the baby we can now lock him up for a long time and somehow that's a bad thing?

i would think an extended sentence for that level of assault and battery would be a good idea regardless of the presence of a fetus.


Except that for the woman who wants that baby, it's going to be worse to lose the baby in addition to the assault.

The whole point of being pro-choice (which I absolutely am) is that the woman herself is the one who is supposed to have control of her reproduction. Killing a woman's wanted fetus against her wishes is a horrible, terrible thing.
 
2012-04-25 10:40:28 AM  

mrshowrules: meanmutton: Fart_Machine: meanmutton: The fiction page. The "pro-lifers secretly getting abortions" thing is overwhelmingly a fantasy.

Citation needed.

meanmutton: It's not about protecting the innocent, it's about protecting the right of women to choose to have a child.

Wat?

1) Yes, a citation alleging that there is a wealth of pro-lifers secretly getting abortions is needed.
2) The law explicitly states that the only time that a murder can be charged is if a pregnant woman who wants to carry her child to term is attacked in such a way that her wanted child is killed.

1) America is more pro-life than other industrialized countries

2) America has more abortions than other industrialized countries

What does that tell you?


That you don't have a good grasp on causal relationships.
 
2012-04-25 10:43:13 AM  

meanmutton: CapnBlues: meanmutton: So we have a law that says when a woman who is, say, 5 months pregnant with a wanted baby is assaulted by her husband or boyfriend and loses the baby we can now lock him up for a long time and somehow that's a bad thing?

i would think an extended sentence for that level of assault and battery would be a good idea regardless of the presence of a fetus.

Except that for the woman who wants that baby, it's going to be worse to lose the baby in addition to the assault.

The whole point of being pro-choice (which I absolutely am) is that the woman herself is the one who is supposed to have control of her reproduction. Killing a woman's wanted fetus against her wishes is a horrible, terrible thing.


right, but as long as it's aggravated assault/battery/attempted murder, or whatever -- why add this layer of complexity to it? if you're going to exact grievous bodily harm on another person, I see no reason why you should ever be let out of prison. you're done. you've lapsed on your end of the social contract, and now you have to stay in jail. If we locked up only violent people and found better, more cost-effective sentences for the nonviolent offenders, we'd prevent more suffering and save money.

this layer of complexity, of adding a new life to it, just to satisfy some sense of revenge. i don't get it. it's not about protecting anyone. it's about satisfying the desire for revenge
 
2012-04-25 10:45:46 AM  

CapnBlues: i would think an extended sentence for that level of assault and battery would be a good idea regardless of the presence of a fetus.


Beat a biatch, do a stretch?
 
2012-04-25 10:46:13 AM  

meanmutton: mrshowrules: meanmutton: Fart_Machine: meanmutton: The fiction page. The "pro-lifers secretly getting abortions" thing is overwhelmingly a fantasy.

Citation needed.

meanmutton: It's not about protecting the innocent, it's about protecting the right of women to choose to have a child.

Wat?

1) Yes, a citation alleging that there is a wealth of pro-lifers secretly getting abortions is needed.
2) The law explicitly states that the only time that a murder can be charged is if a pregnant woman who wants to carry her child to term is attacked in such a way that her wanted child is killed.

1) America is more pro-life than other industrialized countries

2) America has more abortions than other industrialized countries

What does that tell you?

That you don't have a good grasp on causal relationships.


How does it demonstrate that? What observation did I make based on the information?
 
2012-04-25 10:46:54 AM  

NightOwl2255: CapnBlues: i would think an extended sentence for that level of assault and battery would be a good idea regardless of the presence of a fetus.

Beat a biatch, do a stretch?


life, i would say.
 
2012-04-25 10:48:21 AM  

CapnBlues: Just my two cents as a neuroscientist.


I agree. My wife and I were on Medicade Superior when she was pregnant, because I was...underemployed.
Before Elvis was born, I got a good job, and put my domestic partner (we aren't formally married) on my insurance. From his pulpit, my dad spoke out against domestic partnerships, and I had to pull him aside and explain to him he was saying he didn't want his daughter in (common) law to benefit from our union. He has since STFU about it.
 
2012-04-25 10:49:48 AM  

CapnBlues: s2s2s2:
Soooo...it is the problem of people without empathy. Thanks for confirming.

i think there's an important distinction between lack of the capacity of empathy versus the lack of instinct for empathy. Most individuals have the capacity of empathy -- if properly motivated to step into another's shoes, they gladly do. What many people lack is the instinct to do it automatically. I think it's a key distinction between modern conservatism and liberalism. Most conservative politicians and voters -- particularly those who identify as libertarians -- are fully capable of empathy, as evidenced by Dick Cheney's support for gay marriage, because he understands how his daughter feels and can project that onto people like his daughter. What falls apart for them is when they think about the way their voting behavior affects others, they don't have that automatic "whoah, what if I were poor and lost my job?" reaction. Liberals seem to have that automatic "ooooh, yeah, there but for bad luck go I" reaction, and thus they vote for social welfare programs.

Just my two cents as a neuroscientist.


Yeah, that's definitely a big part of it, but I'm suggesting that there are situations where even those with a highly tuned instinct for empathy cannot put themselves into another's shoes because those shoes are practically alien. That's why I brought up the cancer thing a few posts prior. All the empathy in the world does not appear to prepare people for those kinds of life-and-death decisions.
 
2012-04-25 10:49:59 AM  

meanmutton: 1) Yes, a citation alleging that there is a wealth of pro-lifers secretly getting abortions is needed.


Actually no. The citation would be that pro-lifers never get abortions. I mean if you're going to put forward the claim at least back it up.

meanmutton: 2) The law explicitly states that the only time that a murder can be charged is if a pregnant woman who wants to carry her child to term is attacked in such a way that her wanted child is killed.


Assaulting and killing women is still against the law unless you're saying that infertile women are worth less than fertile ones.

meanmutton: So your argument is "let's fight this perfectly reasonable law


And this is where you fail.
 
2012-04-25 10:51:29 AM  
Use of ibuprofin is known to increase the likelihood that a fertilized egg will not successfully implant in the uterus. Under Tennessee law, the released mense of any woman who is known to use ibuprofin should be examined for the presence of a discarded fertilized egg. If one is identified, a police investigation is warranted to determine whether the fertilized egg was discarded as a consequence of use of ibuprofin and, if so, whether the miscarriage was intended (allowing first-degree homicide charges) or unintended (allowing negligent homicide charges).
 
2012-04-25 10:52:00 AM  

s2s2s2: Bontesla: By the way, Ann Romney said that she loved the lack of choice some women have when they're single parents forced to both work and raise a family. It's the lack of choice she loves.

No she didn't. She stated, poorly, that she loves that we care about the people that don't have a choice. Stop being a disingenuous, catty person.


Funny how the Romneys seem to always be "stating poorly" how little they care about the poor and working poor... Almost like they're completely out of touch with anything resembling what most Americans experience.

But, you know, Mitt knows what it's like to worry about getting a pink slip and he and Ann know what suffering like since they had to live off their stock earnings for a bit.

The poor things. They can totally relate to a single mother with two minimum wage jobs who has to decide between buying groceries or medicine for a sick child.
 
2012-04-25 10:53:28 AM  
Headso


karnal: There is a big difference in wanting unemployed parents on wellfare to get back into the workforce and the stay at home mom who voluntarily 'works' the homefront while her husband (or significant other) goes to work.

If you get financial support from society your work raising children has no dignity, if you get financial support from your husband your work raising children has dignity.



If you don't think there are people out there that take advantage of the welfare system (and the percentage is high), then any conversation between us is pointless.

No doubt, there are some that are in need of financial support and a foot up while trying to get back to work, and then there are the others who have found their status in life - who are happy to live off the government. Republicans want to help them (force them) get back to work.....and the Democrats are happy to keep them where they are as long as the show up to vote.
 
2012-04-25 10:54:06 AM  

CapnBlues: s2s2s2:
Soooo...it is the problem of people without empathy. Thanks for confirming.

i think there's an important distinction between lack of the capacity of empathy versus the lack of instinct for empathy. Most individuals have the capacity of empathy -- if properly motivated to step into another's shoes, they gladly do. What many people lack is the instinct to do it automatically. I think it's a key distinction between modern conservatism and liberalism. Most conservative politicians and voters -- particularly those who identify as libertarians -- are fully capable of empathy, as evidenced by Dick Cheney's support for gay marriage, because he understands how his daughter feels and can project that onto people like his daughter. What falls apart for them is when they think about the way their voting behavior affects others, they don't have that automatic "whoah, what if I were poor and lost my job?" reaction. Liberals seem to have that automatic "ooooh, yeah, there but for bad luck go I" reaction, and thus they vote for social welfare programs.

Just my two cents as a neuroscientist.


Your two cents are worth more than a $1.50 offered up by some Farkers.
 
2012-04-25 10:54:25 AM  

s2s2s2: CapnBlues: Just my two cents as a neuroscientist.

I agree. My wife and I were on Medicade Superior when she was pregnant, because I was...underemployed.
Before Elvis was born, I got a good job, and put my domestic partner (we aren't formally married) on my insurance. From his pulpit, my dad spoke out against domestic partnerships, and I had to pull him aside and explain to him he was saying he didn't want his daughter in (common) law to benefit from our union. He has since STFU about it.


things like this are why it's so important for liberals in general to try to convince conservatives not by calling them corporate tools or whatever, but rather by saying "can you imagine a scenario where you might need [government program]? In return, are you willing to pay a very slightly higher marginal rate, to know that if you needed that program, you would have it available to you?" Same thing with social issues. What if your kid, brother, or sister came out of the closet? Would you want to deny them rights and protections under the law?

That sort of thing. Inducing empathy is the key to winning people over to the side of social good, in my opinion. And inducing empathy is time-consuming, but it's also the right thing to do. Essentially, golden rule the biches. :)
 
2012-04-25 10:58:25 AM  
I must have missed the news about Tennessee fixing all the real problems so that they have time to dick around with shiat like this.

It will take quite a lot to beat Floriduh in the "Stupidest State in America" contest. Also in the running: Oklahoma, Arizona, Texas, Minnesota, for starters.
 
2012-04-25 10:59:52 AM  

meanmutton: Fart_Machine: "There is a problem with people being killed because they're pregnant, or being assaulted," he said.

Wat?

You've never worked in a woman's shelter, have you? It's not an uncommon occurrence for men to beat their pregnant wives/girlfriends in order to try to induce a miscarriage.


So that was legal in Tennessee before this law was introduced?
 
2012-04-25 11:00:46 AM  

Fart_Machine: Actually no. The citation would be that pro-lifers never get abortions. I mean if you're going to put forward the claim at least back it up.


Was going to make this point. Is there evidence that most women that get abortions were (prior to the choice) against or pro-choice on principle.

I suspect that poverty/ignorance is the leading cause of elective abortions. I suspect that neither pro-lifers or pro-choicers have the market cornered on that.
 
2012-04-25 11:01:12 AM  
Interesting fact: I represented the first person to be charged under Tennessee's 1989 viable fetus as a victim statute. Client was charged with First Degree Murder for allegedly kicking a pregnant woman in the stomach. Brutal allegations. We put on some proof that her other boyfriend was responsible and I caught the mother in at least 20 major lies on cross examination. After a four day trail, it took the jury only an hour and fifteen minutes to acquit him on all counts, and they ordered, had delivered and ate their lunch during that time.

As an attorney, I am a little concerned a concerned with this bill. I think that instead of creating a new offense the legislator should have simply passed a bill that allowed this to be used as a statutory aggravating factor, that the jury or judge could find and then use to enhance someone's sentence. I believe it would have accomplished their stated goals (though not their political ones) and would have been a change that everyone could have supported.

I am also concerned this law could be used to charge a woman who uses RU486. The use of these pills are not medical procedures, as commonly defined, and the use of the pill causes harm to the fetus. So it appears the Tennessee legislator just outlawed the use of RU486.
 
2012-04-25 11:01:39 AM  

Serious Black: Yeah, that's definitely a big part of it, but I'm suggesting that there are situations where even those with a highly tuned instinct for empathy cannot put themselves into another's shoes because those shoes are practically alien. That's why I brought up the cancer thing a few posts prior. All the empathy in the world does not appear to prepare people for those kinds of life-and-death decisions.


They may have an instinct for empathy, sure, but part of such an instinct is sorting out what it would be like to be another person. If they don't do that, I would argue that they're not really showing empathy. Like many mental characteristics, empathy exists on a spectrum. Simon Baron-Cohen (yes, related to Borat) even designed a survey/inventory to measure the "empathy quotient" like the IQ. Like with many psychological behaviors, i'd actually expect that the likelihood of a person taking someone else's perspective is more influenced by situational factors than by some innate capacity for empathy. For example, a generally high-empathizing individual may actually display low empathy when dealing with black people, homosexuals, or some other out-group.

Perspective-taking is a cognitively-demanding task, and people in general are cognitive misers, of sorts. We save our mental resources for when we feel we really need them. In a way, being a noninstinctual empathizer can be an adaptive trait, if you think about it. You just push ahead, disregarding how your behavior affects others, and in the process you are likely to get what you want. Politicians, both liberal and conservative, are not the sort to worry about the feelings of others. They take what they want until someone won't let them take it, then they take it anyway.

Rant rant. I should be writing my dissertation instead. :/
 
2012-04-25 11:02:08 AM  

karnal: If you don't think there are people out there that take advantage of the welfare system (and the percentage is high)


Because you say so?
 
2012-04-25 11:02:14 AM  

mrshowrules: Your two cents are worth more than a $1.50 offered up by some Farkers.


thanks buddy. i dig your work, too.
 
2012-04-25 11:02:26 AM  
So an arsonist who burns down an IVF clinic will be charged with murder?
 
2012-04-25 11:03:18 AM  
It's amazing how there is not one sound, logical defense of this bill that could possibly be construed as anything except anti-women's rights. You can't even claim it's pro-life since the bill criminalizes miscarriage, something that is often not the result of any specific act. It's criminalizing random and unpredictable unfortunate occurrences. This is psychosis of the highest magnitude on par with Xerxes whipping the ocean to try and solve his problems.
 
2012-04-25 11:03:58 AM  

Guidette Frankentits: So an arsonist who burns down an IVF clinic will be charged with murder?


genocide, actually. :)
 
2012-04-25 11:05:04 AM  

s2s2s2: Headso: Bontesla: I was being literal . . . And catty. I'm okay with it.

And you shouldn't feel bad about it either, the assholes that suddenly care about attacks on these politicians wives after 4 years of trashing Michelle Obama are hypocritical. It also sets the narrative and puts them on the defensive trying to explain what marie antoinette was actually saying.

I care about attacks hitting a valid target. There is plenty to complain about with the ROMenemies, but doing it for the wrong reason, or just plain getting it wrong serves THEM, not us.


While I understand the point you're making, I respectfully disagree.

I was responding to the absurd claim that President Obama has stated motherhood was unimportant or less important than a career. It was a lie.

I responded to that with an equally absurd claim. I responded not only to show the absurdity but also to get at the argument at hand. It wasn't malicious. I stand by it.
 
2012-04-25 11:05:27 AM  

CapnBlues: NightOwl2255: CapnBlues: i would think an extended sentence for that level of assault and battery would be a good idea regardless of the presence of a fetus.

Beat a biatch, do a stretch?

life, i would say.


That would preclude any rehabilitation. If you're going to lock them away for life, what's the point? Why not just put them to sleep? I'm not sure one aggravated assault means the person is forever without value to society. The context would matter too much.
 
2012-04-25 11:06:19 AM  

karnal: Headso


karnal: There is a big difference in wanting unemployed parents on wellfare to get back into the workforce and the stay at home mom who voluntarily 'works' the homefront while her husband (or significant other) goes to work.

If you get financial support from society your work raising children has no dignity, if you get financial support from your husband your work raising children has dignity.

If you don't think there are people out there that take advantage of the welfare system (and the percentage is high), then any conversation between us is pointless.

No doubt, there are some that are in need of financial support and a foot up while trying to get back to work, and then there are the others who have found their status in life - who are happy to live off the government. Republicans want to help them (force them) get back to work.....and the Democrats are happy to keep them where they are as long as the show up to vote.


I'm pretty sure every liberal I know who fervently supports a strong welfare program would readily admit that some people game the system. The question is how many people are gaming the system? I happen to think it's a pretty small percentage, and I get the impression that reactionaries think it's at least a significant minority if not a majority. The evidence seems to suggest I'm right. Remember the Florida welfare drug testing law? Reactionaries were convinced that tons of people were using all kinds of illegal drugs while living high and mighty off of free money and that they would save millions of dollars. Instead, they found that the rate of drug use was about a third of the rate in the general population, and the program actually cost the state money. It turns out that illegal drugs cost a lot, and poor people would rather spend what little dough they have on necessities like food, water, and shelter.
 
2012-04-25 11:06:36 AM  
You know what kills a lot of babies? Lack of affordable health care. When right-wingers are pushing for that as hard as they push for crap like this, I'll consider the possibility that they aren't completely full of shiat.

/not holding my breath
 
2012-04-25 11:08:00 AM  

Dusk-You-n-Me: karnal: If you don't think there are people out there that take advantage of the welfare system (and the percentage is high)

Because you say so?


Last I saw, the rate of Welfare Fraud had been on the decline for the last decade... and the majority of welfare fraud was committed by vendors, not individuals.

I've seen figures around 4%, but I guess accurate statistics are hard to get for this issue.
 
2012-04-25 11:08:10 AM  
Rep. Matthew Hill, R-Jonesborough, said Democrats were "playing the 'what if' game" he knows of no unwarranted "horrible instances" of prosecution in other states with similar laws covering embryos.

It's not the 'What if' game it's the 'Try writing a law CORRECTLY the FIRST time' game. Seriously, you might have the best of intentions, but if you write something this open-ended, some A-hole down the road is going to use it incorrectly, if not in your state, then in one of the others you allude to. Seriously, elections should be a year early, and all legislators should have to spend that year getting educated on law, since they're gung-farking-ho to start writing them. The ;east we could ask is that they know what they're doing first.
 
2012-04-25 11:09:10 AM  

Serious Black: Bontesla: s2s2s2: Bontesla: I was being literal . . . And catty. I'm okay with it.

So long as it's a Republitard on the receiving end. I don't like the idea of Romoremormon(e)y as president. But let's keep the criticism honest and constructive, if we want a better world.

No. I'm equally catty with everyone. It's based on mood and not person I'm conversing with. He's a spectacularly easy traget and I believe in feeding the trolls when I'm at work.

My criticism was honest and constructive. The Romney's hold both the position that motherhood is the most important job while espousing that stay-at-home moms aren't feeling the value of hard work. Mitt Romney argued that stay-at-home moms need the "dignity of work".

Here's how you square that circle. Mitt Romney got so much dignity from his work that he was able to legally give some of his dignity to his stay-at-home wife through his marriage contract, and she got enough from this gift that she didn't need to get any more dignity of her own by entering the work force.


Ha! I love it!
 
2012-04-25 11:09:54 AM  

karnal: Headso


karnal: There is a big difference in wanting unemployed parents on wellfare to get back into the workforce and the stay at home mom who voluntarily 'works' the homefront while her husband (or significant other) goes to work.

If you get financial support from society your work raising children has no dignity, if you get financial support from your husband your work raising children has dignity.


If you don't think there are people out there that take advantage of the welfare system (and the percentage is high), then any conversation between us is pointless.

No doubt, there are some that are in need of financial support and a foot up while trying to get back to work, and then there are the others who have found their status in life - who are happy to live off the government. Republicans want to help them (force them) get back to work.....and the Democrats are happy to keep them where they are as long as the show up to vote.


Besides the silliness about a high percentage of welfare recipients doing fraudulently. Why is the work of actually raising the kids not dignified if you are getting assistance from the state?
 
2012-04-25 11:11:34 AM  

s2s2s2: Hates when you waste the shake:
[bluraymedia.ign.com image 480x330]


Torchwood was such a gay show... but at least we got to watch Capt. Jack die a few times in each episode.

But back on target. Did they make allowance for alien babies? You know they aborted one on Torchwood, right? It was even late in the third trimester.
 
2012-04-25 11:11:42 AM  

palelizard: CapnBlues: NightOwl2255: CapnBlues: i would think an extended sentence for that level of assault and battery would be a good idea regardless of the presence of a fetus.

Beat a biatch, do a stretch?

life, i would say.

That would preclude any rehabilitation. If you're going to lock them away for life, what's the point? Why not just put them to sleep? I'm not sure one aggravated assault means the person is forever without value to society. The context would matter too much.


i'm sorry, are you under the impression that prison is a system of rehabilitation? hahahahahaha
 
2012-04-25 11:13:16 AM  

Serious Black: I'm pretty sure every liberal I know who fervently supports a strong welfare program would readily admit that some people game the system.


People have been gaming systems since systems were invented. Hammurabi wasn't even done hammering out the Code on a clay tablet before someone was looking for a way to turn a dishonest buck off of it.

What conservatives always fail to realize is that there are more and larger scams running than some poor [place favorite minority-to-hate here] taking $300 in welfare per month more than they should. Conservatives actually celebrate corporate welfare and its total abuse. They elevate conservative politicians who make life-long careers out of cheating the system to levels of God-like reverence. Then they pitch tantrums about poor people having access to refrigerators.

It's an ideology that fetishizes abuse.
 
2012-04-25 11:13:43 AM  

NightOwl2255: Mrs. Romney understand the hardship of stay-at-home moms. I mean have you ever tried to fill the tanks of two Cadillacs AT THE SAME TIME?? It ain't easy my friends.


If you can piss gasoline, it just takes a few yoga lessons.
 
2012-04-25 11:13:46 AM  

Headso: karnal: There is a big difference in wanting unemployed parents on wellfare to get back into the workforce and the stay at home mom who voluntarily 'works' the homefront while her husband (or significant other) goes to work.

If you get financial support from society your work raising children has no dignity, if you get financial support from your husband your work raising children has dignity.


Well argued.
 
2012-04-25 11:15:51 AM  

CapnBlues: i'm sorry, are you under the impression that prison is a system of rehabilitation? hahahahahaha


Intended to be, I guess. I freely acknowledge it doesn't work properly. But if your only goal is permanent punishment, why bother with prisons at all? Just start lopping off limbs. "Hey, you beat your girlfriend. Which hand do you want to keep?"
 
2012-04-25 11:15:51 AM  

meanmutton: So we have a law that says when a woman who is, say, 5 months pregnant with a wanted baby is assaulted by her husband or boyfriend and loses the baby we can now lock him up for a long time and somehow that's a bad thing?


The battery would be easier to prove than an intent to kill the fetus.
 
2012-04-25 11:19:20 AM  

keylock71: Funny how the Romneys seem to always be "stating poorly" how little they care about the poor and working poor... Almost like they're completely out of touch with anything resembling what most Americans experience.


So they are having a hard time conveying how little they care? Or are you just stating your point poorly?
 
2012-04-25 11:20:05 AM  

palelizard: CapnBlues: i'm sorry, are you under the impression that prison is a system of rehabilitation? hahahahahaha

Intended to be, I guess. I freely acknowledge it doesn't work properly. But if your only goal is permanent punishment, why bother with prisons at all? Just start lopping off limbs. "Hey, you beat your girlfriend. Which hand do you want to keep?"


it's more expensive to execute people, and chopping off limbs is unconstitutional (cruel/unusual). Lifetime imprisonment is cheaper and is constitutional.
 
2012-04-25 11:23:09 AM  

CapnBlues: it's more expensive to execute people, and chopping off limbs is unconstitutional (cruel/unusual). Lifetime imprisonment is cheaper and is constitutional.


Well now I have.
 
Displayed 50 of 385 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report