What do the liberal justices on the Supreme Court have in common with Saudi Arabia? They both condone pedophiles:…

No! It was cruel and unusually inhumane punishment without the benefit of a trial by the child’s peers.

Liberals are unable to put themselves into the shoes of those they claim they are protecting because their minds are shut to reality.

What would those that ruled that the death penalty was not appropriate for those that rape children if it was their child? Oh, I forgot they support abortion so they can kill their children before they are born.

Rulings such as this are proof that a select few of inbreed liberals have been able to B.S. many that they know what’s good for everyone.

The only way liberals are able to proliferate is by never killing their own kind no matter how hideous the crime – because they can make them all bitter – oops better.

I, also, don’t believe death to be preferred to rape, but there is a reason rape has long been euphemistically known as “a fate worse than death”.

Of course, MB4, any parent would rather, if forced to choose, have a raped daughter than a murdered daughter.

Mrs. Happy Housewife on June 26, 2008 at 12:10 PM

Though that does remind me of a show I’d rather not name (it’ll out me as a Sci-Fi fan).

In it a badly wounder soldier is being hauled away by the enemy, and in slow-motion style, another soldier, who had been shooting at the enemy, sees what’s going on and turns her gun on her fellow soldiers and shoots him in the forehead.

Rather than let a fellow soldier be tortured, she ended his misery.

She believed she was being humane. I’m not saying that’s the right thing to do, but I understand the sentiment.

Some posters seem to feel that the antipathy to child rape is a sentimental fad on the part of redneck conservatives. I worked for many years as a psychiatric nurse and saw often and up close the devastation created by childhood rape. Many of the victims are left without the ability to trust anyone and without any ability to develop any control over their emotions or their lives. They are doomed to lives of frequent hospitalizations usually brought on by suicide attempts because they are unable to trust anyone else enough to ask for help. Someone doing life will have it easy by comparison. Since the perpetrators so often reoffend (and so often are released in spite express sentencing) the death penalty would also serve to decrease the number of child rapes over all.

The Supreme Court’s leftists have been really trying the public’s patience lately….

We are not talking about if rape is good or bad, but rather if being raped is worse than being murdered.

MB4 on June 25, 2008 at 6:51 PM

No, you’re talking about whether a parent would rather have a child returned raped or returned dead.

The answer is obvious.

She’s talking about whether or not a victim would rather be raped or murdered. The answer, unless you’ve been raped yourself, is not so obvious.

Thank you, Esthier, for saying what I meant. And what I actually did say earlier:

With a murder, the victim’s suffering ends. With the rape of a child, the victim’s suffering lasts a lifetime. Which crime is truly the more depraved?

Mrs. Happy Housewife on June 25, 2008 at 6:21 PM

We have a local girl who was raped outside the library. She’s suffered a fracture to the forehead, several strokes, and is blind now. Doctors are keeping her in a medically induced coma. Her rapist is sixteen. Last year, at the ripe old age of fifteen, he raped a 62-year-old day care worker.

Murder ends the suffering for the victim; rape is the “gift” that keeps on giving.

I dare anyone to read the actual case in the Supreme Court decision and declare that that little eight-year-old girl will not be scarred, emotionally and physically, the rest of her life.

Of course, MB4, any parent would rather, if forced to choose, have a raped daughter than a murdered daughter. That, however, was not what I was talking about and your analogy was incongruent with my previous statement.

To whomever thinks that the death penalty is more expensive than prison, shut the F&^% up and use your brain for a minute. The ONLY reason certain death penalty cases have become so expensive is the ritual lengthy appeal process and cost of keeping these animals in prison while slimy lawyers do what they can to win their game (a game that has nothing to do with justice).

cannonball on June 25, 2008 at 8:45 PM

So you want us to shut the F&^% up and use our brains even though you admit that we’re right.

Maybe you’re the one who needs to find some use for your f-ing brain.

It’s a fact that it’s more expensive. That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be done. Don’t get all pissy because some of us know how to state a fact. Just use your arguments for why that fact doesn’t matter.

That’s what many of us already did.

We are not talking about if rape is good or bad, but rather if being raped is worse than being murdered.

MB4 on June 25, 2008 at 6:51 PM

No, you’re talking about whether a parent would rather have a child returned raped or returned dead.

The answer is obvious.

She’s talking about whether or not a victim would rather be raped or murdered. The answer, unless you’ve been raped yourself, is not so obvious.

For some people, the pain of being raped is something impossible to get over; it can be the thing that defines and haunts that person. For some, it’s a tragic chapter in an otherwise decent life.

Obviously parents can’t know how their child will react and obviously hope it’ll be the latter. So their desire to see their child return is a desire for the best interest for their child, and good parents will do whatever they can to ensure the latter outcome is the one their child has; however, they can only do so much.

The death penalty, which is rarely used even for first degree murder, would give a perversive incentive for the rapist to kill his victim. Pretty obvious.

MB4 on June 25, 2008 at 6:19 PM

And seriously, this is not your best argument. When you rape and murder someone the death penalty is definitely on the table. If you just rape someone, you very well might get life.

If you’ll notice, this was in Louisiana’s law, but that doesn’t mean it was used in many cases if any before this one. It was just an option, one they reserved for especially gruesome rape cases, like this one, where the young girl required surgery, not because she was beaten but just because she was raped.

theregoestheneighborhood on June 26, 2008 at 1:12 AM

Very few, percentage wise, are released on a technicality. Many are exonerated by DNA evidence or other new methods.

You still havent answered my question though, are the lives of those who are exonerated forfeit?

The majority decision, credited to Justice Kennedy, was a total free-lance operation that mocks sound jurisprudence. A lousy precedent was established when Samuel Chase was impeached in 1804 but not convicted by the Senate in March 1805, resulting in the spurious notion that no SC Justice would be impeached due to their performance on the bench. (Impeachment, supposedly, reserved for criminality only). This suggestion that the Justices can “make up any decision imaginable based on the latest pipe dream of choice” with impunity needs to be abolished NOW.

Kennedy should be impeached to establish a permanent example that the law and Constitution should rule, not the guesstimated societal preferences and other BS as divined by closeted Justices.

While a person who kills could conceivably reform and never kill again, it is virtually 100% certain that a pedophile or rapist is unable to reform and if released from prison will rape again and again.
If the death penalty is out then it is time to remodel Alcatraz.

No death except as repayment for death, because if they allow capital punishment for child rape, what’s next? Capital punishment for violent assault? For larceny, a la 17th century England? Either is unlikely in the extreme, but partly because they don’t trust the public and partly because they know their own test is crap and don’t trust it to produce persuasive distinctions between child rape and some lesser crime in a future case, they’ve decided to simply take the issue off the table.

That’s it right there. SCOTUS has trust issues.

An easy read and insightful. Thanks, Allah.

Did you ever think that there is a lengthy appeal process because execution is irrevocable? How many people on Death Row have been vindicated? Are their lives forfeit?

Squid Shark on June 25, 2008 at 11:24 PM

Probably not as many as you think. Most people hear those stories of people being released from Death Row after years, and assume they were all exonerated. Many times, though, the release is on a technicality. Probably 90% of these highly publicized cases did NOT actually exonerate the accused.

Of course, to death penalty opponents — and activists — that knee-jerk reaction is exactly what they hope for.

Yet another sad, sad day for this country…Something that is becoming all too common when the Supreme Court is involved.

The ONLY reason certain death penalty cases have become so expensive is the ritual lengthy appeal process and cost of keeping these animals in prison while slimy lawyers do what they can to win their game (a game that has nothing to do with justice).

Did you ever think that there is a lengthy appeal process because execution is irrevocable? How many people on Death Row have been vindicated? Are their lives forfeit?

for your federal judiciary, in particular the Supreme Court: Kennedy v. Louisiana. Short story long: executing criminals who rape children is now unconstitutional.

UFB.

Once again, the prime mover and shaker in this decision is Justice Anthony …..

And maybe in the eyes of less ordinary Americans too, as we’ve all heard stories about the sort of special “justice” reserved in prison for inmates convicted of abusing kids.

Because of the heinous nature of the crime, when they get through with him in prison he’s going to curse the court and wish he had opted for the more humane lethal injection – assuming, of course, they don’t kill him.

In a story I just heard on radio, the citizens of Italy have their own form of justice when dealing with rapists.

The story goes that two rapists managed to beat Italy’s system of justice and were let go.
Within a short period of time, each rapist was killed on the street in broad daylight, and for some reason the police couldn’t find any eye witnesses.

Most telling of all about the court’s decision was not that Kennedy was the swing vote, but that Ruth Bader Ginsberg, a woman, a Jew, a grandmother, and a card-carrying member of the ACLU that proclaims it protects ‘the children’, went along with the decision.

It’s yet another instance where liberalism supersedes logic and reality.

How will Ted, Justice Kennedy, Leahy and many many others answer?

I imagine him saying “Mary Jo Kopechne? Yes, I remember you. I am so sorry about that bridge crash thing. Really, I am really really sorry. What is that button you have your finger on? A trap door? To where? Oh crap…Did I mention how really, really sorry I am for leaving you to die?”

click.