|
Post by furoraceltica on Feb 12, 2009 11:58:34 GMT -6
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2009 15:51:22 GMT -6
If the Mexican Greens want to be outcasts, they should forfeit the right to use the Green Party name
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Feb 12, 2009 15:58:11 GMT -6
If the Mexican Greens want to be outcasts, they should forfeit the right to use the Green Party name Why do you own it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2009 16:02:59 GMT -6
If the Mexican Greens want to be outcasts, they should forfeit the right to use the Green Party name Why do you own it? No..but they don't. You can bet the umbrella organization will demand they drop the "Green" from their name
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Feb 12, 2009 16:08:37 GMT -6
No..but they don't. You can bet the umbrella organization will demand they drop the "Green" from their name Well why don't you head on down there to make sure it happens.
|
|
|
Post by Elric of Melnibone on Feb 12, 2009 16:08:42 GMT -6
I do not know why they should protest. I mean, the Green party is all about saving resources and the planet. Executed murderers can certainly be used for fertilizer. In fact, i would think they were happy with using murderers to nourish the planet.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 12, 2009 16:14:26 GMT -6
No..but they don't. You can bet the umbrella organization will demand they drop the "Green" from their name Well why don't you head on down there to make sure it happens. Why don't you?
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Feb 12, 2009 16:16:03 GMT -6
Well why don't you head on down there to make sure it happens. Why don't you? It doesn't matter to me what they do, so why should I? It seems to matter to you.
|
|
|
Post by D.E.E. on Feb 12, 2009 21:47:12 GMT -6
If the Mexican Greens want to be outcasts, they should forfeit the right to use the Green Party name Why? Do the Greens dictate what their members can believe in?
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Feb 12, 2009 22:29:50 GMT -6
If the Mexican Greens want to be outcasts, they should forfeit the right to use the Green Party name Why? Do the Greens dictate what their members can believe in? Since the "greens" are where all the socialists and commies went to live after that shining example of freedom, the USSR, collapsed, of course they think they can dictate to their members. It's also just a tad hilarious that these two political entities, which have been responsible for more of their own citizens' deaths than any others in the history of mankind, oppose the DP. ;D
|
|
|
Post by furoraceltica on Feb 13, 2009 4:06:36 GMT -6
If the Mexican Greens want to be outcasts, they should forfeit the right to use the Green Party name So, people forfeit certain things when they do certain acts? Strange thing to come from an anti. I hought you guys believed no matter what you did, you kept your rights
|
|
Tim S
Old Hand
Posts: 567
|
Post by Tim S on Feb 13, 2009 4:30:56 GMT -6
Why? Do the Greens dictate what their members can believe in? Since the "greens" are where all the socialists and commies went to live after that shining example of freedom, the USSR, collapsed, of course they think they can dictate to their members. It's also just a tad hilarious that these two political entities, which have been responsible for more of their own citizens' deaths than any others in the history of mankind, oppose the DP. ;D What a load of dung you write. Woud you like to enhance your last paragraph and in doing so you might see how stupid you are. Which two political entities? I presume you mean Communism and the other?
|
|
|
Post by honeyroastedpeanut on Feb 13, 2009 7:13:37 GMT -6
They don't want to punish the Green Party of Mexico, they just don't see them as a "Green" party anymore. Pretty simple and they are right doing so because the Greens are always against the DP. It's like a liberal party promoting a ban of gay marriages - they wouldn't be considered as liberal by other liberal parties any more. That has nothing to do with punishment but with an understanding of the own ideology, values etc.
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Feb 13, 2009 7:56:48 GMT -6
What a load of dung you write. Sez you, Euroweenie. ;D I meant communism and its' imperfect sister ideology, socialism. which Marx defined as "The political and economic philosophy in which the concept of class struggle plays a central role in understanding society's allegedly inevitable development from bourgeois oppression under capitalism to a socialist and ultimately classless society." The Nazis were pikers at death compared to the communists and socialists. You do realize that, right, Tim?
|
|
Tim S
Old Hand
Posts: 567
|
Post by Tim S on Feb 13, 2009 8:16:31 GMT -6
What I do realise is that America has a ridiculous fear for the word socialism. And C and S were nothing compared to the Romans or the Spanish in South America or even you lot with Indians..what i mean is that every nation and political belief has its day.
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Feb 13, 2009 8:29:20 GMT -6
What I do realise is that America has a ridiculous fear for the word socialism. And C and S were nothing compared to the Romans or the Spanish in South America or even you lot with Indians..what i mean is that every nation and political belief has its day. No response on the deaths caused by these ideologies, Tim? Lame. And we've learned to fear extreme ideologies of either side of the spectrum. We generally don't roll over and play dead for extremists, as your nation does. We expend the blood of our sons and daughters to stop them.
|
|
|
Post by honeyroastedpeanut on Feb 13, 2009 8:30:31 GMT -6
What I do realise is that America has a ridiculous fear for the word socialism. And C and S were nothing compared to the Romans or the Spanish in South America or even you lot with Indians..what i mean is that every nation and political belief has its day. I understood your previous arguments, but, uuuum, Stalin, Lenin, Mao etc. killed far more than the Conquista did. Doesn't mean I want to justify the Conquista but you know how many starved in China alone becaue of Mao's "Great Leap Forward"!? It's the same with National Socialism - approximately 7 million people died in the Holocaust and another 60 million in World War II. That's horrendous numbers.
|
|
Tim S
Old Hand
Posts: 567
|
Post by Tim S on Feb 16, 2009 1:23:20 GMT -6
I don't think we should play the numbers game because then one can start talking about weapons etc etc. One bomb today can kill more than have been killed by dictators. Communism is a system doomed to fail. Looks good on paper but is a cruel system. Socialism well one does one mean by that? The Labour party in England is a socialist party, yet i think you would agree that England is a capitalist country. I see socialism as a form of backing up a capitalist society, having a net available to catch those who fall through. Thats my idea anyway. I understand that the USA has a fear of leftwing ideas.Thats natural with the Cuba crisis and McCarthy. However nowadays socialism is to the right of center. Remember its a socialist way of thinking when a government steps in to shore up banks and car manufacturers.
|
|
|
Post by furoraceltica on Feb 16, 2009 3:56:03 GMT -6
They don't want to punish the Green Party of Mexico, they just don't see them as a "Green" party anymore. Pretty simple and they are right doing so because the Greens are always against the DP. It's like a liberal party promoting a ban of gay marriages - they wouldn't be considered as liberal by other liberal parties any more. That has nothing to do with punishment but with an understanding of the own ideology, values etc. So wanting to be tough on crime is incompatible with protecting the environment? Also, who made the European Greens the judge of what is and is not green ideology?
|
|
|
Post by honeyroastedpeanut on Feb 16, 2009 13:02:55 GMT -6
So wanting to be tough on crime is incompatible with protecting the environment? The DP is incompatible with the principles the Green parties stand for. They do not solely care about the environment but about human rights as well. The Green movement pretty much started in Europe out of pacifist and anti-nuclear-power movements. I have never voted for the Greens and wouldn't do so but the DP is definitely incompatible with the Green ideology. If a party is in favour of the DP it's their business but they are not Greens in the traditional meaning anymore. Schwarzenegger is interested in protecting the environment as well but I wouldn't call him a "Green" and he wouldn't want to be labeled as such.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Feb 16, 2009 13:16:25 GMT -6
So wanting to be tough on crime is incompatible with protecting the environment? The DP is incompatible with the principles the Green parties stand for. They do not solely care about the environment but about human rights as well. Does this include people who have been murdered?
|
|
|
Post by honeyroastedpeanut on Feb 16, 2009 15:53:08 GMT -6
Does this include people who have been murdered? You're asking about the human rights of those who have been killed? It's not a human right to have the one who killed you executed and this is not what the DP is about. That's mixed up on this board again and again. Can I, as being opposed to the DP, not feel sorry for the loss, not feel empathy for the family of the victim? Some seem to pretend that empathy is reserved by the Pros which isn't true. There's a difference between empathy for the victim and the family and hatred for the murderer. I feel wrath as well, Stormy, and have to admit that it comes to my mind from time to time that gallows on the town square are not that bad after all. But then I take a deep breath and realize that I could not kill the murderer, that I wouldn't want to watch this and wouldn't want this to be done by others as well. That might be different if someone killed a person I love, I don't know and hope that I'll never have to find out. I understand that many people feel that the DP is necessary but they should be honest. For those not involved in the crime it's not about the victims, it's about revenge as a concept of justice. I don't look down on that and don't feel superior because of my "better" view of justice. I tolerate it. But I just want people to be honest about the DP. They don't have to be ashamed that they want revenge because it's part of human thinking, it's not bad to think like that. But it's not honest and unfair to Antis to give false arguments for the DP like if there's no DP the human rights of the victims are not regarded. Actually it always makes me cringe if - also politicians over here - use murder victims for their political agenda. Murder victims should be remembered and let rest in peace and their horrible fate shouldn't be used to back up one's views.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2009 16:26:38 GMT -6
So wanting to be tough on crime is incompatible with protecting the environment? The DP is incompatible with the principles the Green parties stand for. They do not solely care about the environment but about human rights as well. The Green movement pretty much started in Europe out of pacifist and anti-nuclear-power movements. I have never voted for the Greens and wouldn't do so but the DP is definitely incompatible with the Green ideology. If a party is in favour of the DP it's their business but they are not Greens in the traditional meaning anymore. Schwarzenegger is interested in protecting the environment as well but I wouldn't call him a "Green" and he wouldn't want to be labeled as such. I doubt any Green member would count Ahh-Nuld as one of their own. Greens aren't exactly Nazi-friendly.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Feb 16, 2009 18:04:33 GMT -6
Yes, do they matter anymore?
Oh, Really? What is it a human right to do with them?
I don't feel mixed up about it.
Did I say you couldn't? Personally I'm not for the dp so it will make the family feel better. It's nice that is brings some kind of relief to some. But the main things is punishment and to rid the earth of dangerous people.
Not by this pro. I have never said that ever.
Truth is I have a hard time feeling hatred for someone I don't even know. I have what empathy I can try to put myself in MVS's shoes, but I'm sure I don't totally grasp. I just try to remember how much I love my family and friends.
A murderer should not be executed just because of wrath but because of just punishment.
There would have been I time I may have thought I couldn't execute someone as well, Now however, after reading what some of the murderers did I think I could give the three dose injection.
No person in his or her right mind would.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Feb 16, 2009 18:39:01 GMT -6
You say that being an anti you can feel compassion and empathy, but you then accuse pros of wanting revenge as a comcept of justice. Does that seem fair?
Really? How would you take the previous comment you made?
Is the honesty just supposed to be on the pros side?
Kind of spinning here aren't you? BTW, I'm not ashamed. But thanks for the comfort anyway.
I'm not quite sure what you're saying here. Why should the rights of the victim be disregarded just because they're dead? Is that what you mean?
Politicians can use anything for a political agenda. There are those who are agaist the dp that use it. But I think it's fine for people to be reminded of disgusting human people willing to murder. I don't find it wrong for a politician to tell people that he or she supports the dp and why. Personally I don't think people should forget. They don't need to dwell on it day and night but the fact that murder happens shouldn't be forgotten.
|
|
|
Post by honeyroastedpeanut on Feb 17, 2009 11:41:26 GMT -6
Yes, do they matter anymore? All I'm saying is that there's no right of the victim to have the one who murdered you executed. Who knows if they want the murderer executed anyway? And would it really matter? The US don't have the DP because MVS demand it but because the majority wants it. If someone destroyed my car I would want him to drink five bottles of Tabasco but the court wouldn't punish him that way, right? Punishing is never about the victims, it's about the society as a whole. What human rights have to do with those sentenced to death? They simply have a right to live. We don't earn our right to live so you cannot lose as well, in my opinion. Your existence is not justified by your deeds; this is actually a Protestant priciple: only your faith justifies your existence. According to your opinions you do see the purpose of the DP in protecting the rights of murder victims as well. I claim that the DP has never ever been about that. You say it's about punishment. Why would you punish somebody if the punished person cannot learn a lesson from it? The part about getting rid of dangerous people is something I understand. I don't see a differnce to LWOP there though. I believe that and didn't claim that you said something like that. If you don't feel harted for murderers how can you be in favour of executing them? I cannot hurt somebody I don't hate or at least feel threatened by. Just punishment means death in this case because he killed, right? That's an eye for an eye, revenge. Because you feel wrath or because you feel it's just? Guess we can agree on that.
|
|
|
Post by honeyroastedpeanut on Feb 17, 2009 12:06:47 GMT -6
I said that I don't look down on the concept of retaliation as justice. If I'm not mistaken even Kant believed in retaliation as justice and it's still discussed in German criminal law as a reason for punishment. See above. Nope, I cannot stand that some stupid activist always question the guilt of DR inmates. This is not honest as well. All I want is that the Pro DP lobby admits that it is only about retaliation. I think in a recent post Agaveman agreed on that. And as I said I don't think it's stupid or anything. I just don't believe in it. Gemination is a rhetoric instrument. And of course you're not ashamed because there's no need for it. Rights in the meaning of human rights are always rights to defend yourself against the state. The individual doesn't have any human rights against another individual. So, no, murder victims don't have a human right to have their murderer executed. And I don't know any law which says so. It's fine to remember the victims but they shouldn't be exploited for a political agenda. Who knows what the victim would have wanted? Maybe the family of the victim doesn't support this either and now sees pictures of their loved one used for an election campaign? I just don't like it.
|
|
|
Post by josephdphillips on Feb 17, 2009 12:26:29 GMT -6
All I want is that the Pro DP lobby admits that it is only about retaliation. A reasonable request. It is true -- the death penalty is about retaliation. murder victims don't have a human right to have their murderer executed. And I don't know any law which says so. That is correct. That's why I don't like prosecutors taking into account what MVSes think about punishing their loved one's murderer. It's fine to remember the victims but they shouldn't be exploited for a political agenda. Who knows what the victim would have wanted? Maybe the family of the victim doesn't support this either and now sees pictures of their loved one used for an election campaign? I just don't like it. I don't either. Doing the right thing for murder victims does not require that we know them individually. In fact it does require a certain detachment.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Feb 17, 2009 12:50:44 GMT -6
Yes, do they matter anymore? All I'm saying is that there's no right of the victim to have the one who murdered you executed. Who knows if they want the murderer executed anyway? Many families have testified that their loved one supported capital punishment. But to me that's irrelevant anyway. Executing a murderer makes society safer. If you want to call it retaliation or whatever it doesn't matter to me. As long as it's done that's all I care about.
|
|
|
Post by Stormyweather on Feb 17, 2009 12:55:31 GMT -6
I see it as protecting future victims and just punishment.
|
|