June 25, 2008

Death for a Child Rapist is Not “Cruel” or “Unusual” Punishment. States’ Rights Trounced Once Again.

by @ 5:22 pm. Filed under Judiciary

For background, read this article first. Then read La Shawn Barber’s post titled Supreme Court Rejects Death for Child Rapists. There she asks:

Do you believe child rapists should get the death penalty, whether or not they?ve killed the child?

I was going to post the following as a comment on her blog, but it started getting lengthy, so I figured I’d just post it here as a full post instead.

I teeter on whether I feel it’s OK to execute a child rapist. I guess if I had to vote on it I might vote execution to be OK, but then again I might not. But regardless, while I respect the US Supreme Court’s ruling, I feel it’s another stab against states’ rights. This ruling FIRST came down in 1977, when the US Supreme Court banned execution of rapists back then. The only difference now is that it has been reinforced in regards to when children are the victim.

I don’t find anything in the US Constitution that affirms death for child rapists is cruel. And honestly I think if given an opportunity, the 5 who voted against the death penalty today would outlaw it for all cases, if presented the right opportunity.

Justice Anthony Kennedy said:

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

I don’t find this talk of “proportional punishment” in the Constitution and death for a child rapist is not “cruel” or “unusual”. Proportional punishment for a rapist would be to have them raped as many times as they had raped someone else. It would have to be done in a manner that knowingly disturbed the rapist’s sensibilities, so they actually felt they were “raped” as they did to their victim. I’m sure our US Supreme Court would call that “cruel” and I’d have to agree. We could say someone getting a year in prison for stealing an apple is not necessarily “proportional”, but it’s certainly not “cruel” either. Making an example of a thief is not a bad thing. So this whole talk of “proportional punishment” is a bit lame. If I stole a US Supreme Court justice’s car and was caught, would that justice be OK with simply taking my personal car as punishment? Instead of having me tried, convicted and spending time in prison for theft? Especially since during the time in prison (and black mark on my record for the rest of my life) I’d likely lose way more in potential income than the price of either car. So you can tell I’m not buying the “proportional punishment” argument one bit.

These are continual slaps against states having the right to do much of anything.

In time, homosexuals will be granted so-called “marriage rights” by this court. But just because man’s government declares it does not mean God affirms it.

Luke 23:41, One thief on the cross understood the sentence he received from government was just for his deeds. And never was it said by Christ or His apostles that government bearing the sword against criminal activity was unjust, Romans 13. Certainly we all deserved eternal damnation because we all were sinners and praise God some of us have been granted God’s saving grace. But God allows the governments of man to bear a sword for when someone must be removed from this life for an orderly society. I think our allowing states to decide was best, but they have been overruled by the US Supreme Court and we have to respect that ruling while it is the law of the land.

I’m not sure what happened to the US Constitution in all of this, but obviously we moved from considering that document a long time ago.

Our own President said of the US Constitution:

Mr. President,” one aide in the meeting said. “There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.”

“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” Bush screamed back. “It’s just a god*****d piece of paper!”

So we have many in our government who don’t consider the Constitution much.

7 Responses to “Death for a Child Rapist is Not “Cruel” or “Unusual” Punishment. States’ Rights Trounced Once Again.”

  1. SteelGator Says:

    Like I (and other conservatives) have said millions of times…..Elections have consequences. Two of the liberals on the Supreme Court (2 that ruled in this case) are probably going to step down in the next 4 years. If that is the case, do you really want Obama replacing them with 2 more radical leftist that think our Constitution and protection of children are irrelevant?

    If Obama wins in November that is ensuring that these type rulings and worse will shape our country for the next 30+ years.

  2. SteelGator Says:

    The following article is along these lines. I must post the entire article because it came to me via email and I do not have a link to post. Gary Bauer is the author.

    Building A Permanent Liberal Majority?

    There is a very disturbing report today from the Washington, D.C. news outfit Politico. According to this report, Barack Obama’s campaign intends to invest heavily in states that George W. Bush won in 2004. That’s not news. Obviously, he would have to switch one or two key states, like Florida or Ohio, in order to win in the Electoral College. But what is news is that the campaign plans to target not just one or two states, but 16 states! This report explains why the Obama campaign has decided that $84 million in public financing isn’t enough to run for president. Obama isn’t just running for the White House!

    While some conservatives are thinking our movement can “win by losing” in November, they are deluding themselves. George Soros and the radical Left are focused on the long-term impact of this campaign, and they are furiously working to build a permanent liberal majority. They see Barack Obama’s candidacy as the perfect opportunity to boost liberal turnout and swamp conservatives at the ballot box, from the top of the ticket all the way down to dog catcher.

    This massive and extraordinarily sophisticated effort will require tremendous amounts of money and manpower, and $84 million wouldn’t allow the Obama campaign to target states like Virginia, North Carolina, Montana, North Dakota, Indiana, Georgia, Texas, Wyoming — even Alaska, which hasn’t voted for a Democrat presidential nominee since 1964.

    Obama’s deputy campaign manager, Steve Hildebrand, said, “Texas is a great example of where we might not be able to win the state, but we want to pay a lot of attention to it. It’s one of the most important redistricting opportunities in the country.” As Politico noted, Democrats only need to pick up five seats in both chambers of the Texas Legislature in order to control redistricting after the 2010 census, which could totally alter the political landscape in Texas and send half a dozen new Democrats to Congress in 2012.

    The Obama campaign is also targeting states with key Senate contests, like Colorado, New Mexico and North Carolina. In fact, Barack Obama recently sent out a fundraising appeal for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, in which he wrote, “…a new president isn’t enough. I’ve served long enough in the U.S. Senate to know that … big changes don’t happen without big Senate majorities. …This November, we have a chance to create a Democratic Senate majority like we haven’t seen in decades…”

    Some who think we could “bounce back” in 2010 or 2012 like we did in 1994 are literally gambling with our nation’s future, and that’s a risk I am not willing to take. The radical Left, the pro-abortion groups and the militant homosexual movement have absolutely no intention of letting us dig ourselves out from under the liberal landslide that threatens to bury us this November. Let me give you some idea of what will happen.

    Just yesterday, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi made it absolutely clear that she fully supports the Orwellian-named “Fairness Doctrine,” which would shut down conservative talk radio and force Rush Limbaugh and Dr. James Dobson off the air. Don’t think it can’t happen! The liberals did it once before and they’ll do it again.

    Freedom of speech and religious liberty will be curtailed after the expanded liberal majority in Congress passes so-called “hate crimes laws” silencing pastors and pro-family organizations, like this one, that are fighting the homosexual agenda. Our courts will be packed with ACLU radicals, and same-sex “marriage” will be forced on every state in the union by judicial fiat. Christian business and ministries will be forced to hire homosexuals and offer benefits to their “married” partners.

    Don’t believe me? Come to Washington, D.C., tomorrow and sit in on the House Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee meeting as it holds the first congressional hearings ever on transgender discrimination. Oh, by the way, as a result of the 2006 elections that swept Democrats into power, for the first time in our nation’s history, Congress now has a “Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual and Transgender Equality Caucus” comprised of 52 members of the House of Representatives – 50 of the Democrats!

    As I have said before, the Left isn’t trying to win merely an election. It is trying to destroy our movement. Politics and the pursuit of power is the Left’s “religion,” and millions of liberal Americans are literally tithing to leftwing candidates, like Barack Obama, and to other political causes.

    That’s why two of the largest political action committees in America are the pro-abortion group Emily’s List and the radical anti-war group And it does not bode well for the future of our nation that two of the largest, most well-funded political organizations are dedicated to death and defeat!

    My friends, the result of this election is not a foregone conclusion. The Left didn’t give up in 2000 or 2004. It’s worth noting that John Kerry got more votes for president than any other candidate in American history – except for George W. Bush. The Kerry campaign did everything it had to do to win, and he might be sitting in the Oval Office today except for you! Pro-life, pro-family Americans turned out in droves to defend faith, family and freedom, and they changed history.

  3. rascoe1 Says:

    IC, every vote will count. One vote for McCane, whether we like him or not, means a vote against Barack Obama. What do you think.

  4. IndependentConservative Says:

    I think you should consider the company a man keeps. Whether or not this nation has a death penalty is a minor concern in comparison.

    See you feel Obama is really bad and McCain is just bad, I see them both as equally very bad.

  5. rascoe1 Says:

    Well, what can I say. We will not agree on everything, (smile)

  6. SteelGator Says:

    Using IC’s standards, he can’t vote for any one. McCain is bad….Obama is worse.

    Whether one wants to believe it or not, every vote will count. A vote against McLame is a vote for Obama and his evil Marxist agenda. This includes expanding the right of women to kill their children, support for terrorist regimes, an appeasement mentality that history has shown fails, an anti-Israel agenda, anti-gasoline and failed left winged energy policies, higher taxes, weaker economy, weaker military, pro “fairness doctrine”, pro hate crime legislation (meaning pastors can be throw in jail for preaching the Word of God)…etc, etc, etc.

    I know we won’t agree, but it is what it is.

  7. IndependentConservative Says:

    Both are terrible and neither will see my vote.

    John McCain has said he’s OK with Roe v. Wade as is. McCain said to the San Francisco Chronicle in 1999:

    But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade, which would then force X number of women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations.

    Now he claims otherwise when it’s opportune. The same man who was the foundation of the “Gang of 14”, that ensured LESS real Conservative judges would advance.

    If you want to embrace his lies, go right ahead.

    The anchor babies he allows in illegally and gives citizenship will pick up any population slack!

    And McCain Favors Embryonic Stem Cell Research

    Who Helped Keep Your Gas Prices High By Not Promoting Enough Domestic Oil Drilling? John McCain!

    Anti-gasoline, it’s McCain’s fault we’re in the shape we are in. His along with others.

    Support of terrorist regimes, McCain is a bigger supporter of them than Republicans know, but the Democrats know it, DNC: McCain Retools Double Talk on Energy and Environment.
    Again, consider the company a man keeps. He proposes more drilling just when we happen to have enough Liberals in Congress to ensure domestic drilling won’t expand much.

    Israel agenda! America already has a military that is overtaxed. We do not need to go fighting more wars right now for Israel. I repeat, we do not need to go fighting more wars right now for Israel. Iran is Israel’s immediate concern and a war with Iran is not something the USA can afford at the moment in terms of money or manpower. And yes giving our current state I have had to come to admitting that fact.

    Energy policies. While McCain has made some proposals that sound good, he’s going to be doing all that the tree hugging Liberals want.

    Both John Sidney McCain III and Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. are Using Junk Science to Play Americans for Fools!

    Bad Idea Alert! John McCain Desires His Own Form of United Nations, the “League of Democracies”. As if Yet Another Globalist Group is a Good Thing.

    Weaker economy, weaker military, just wait and see how our military and economy look if rushing to war with Iran for Israel happens. Our guys are already pulling more tours than they were expecting to do as it is.

    Fairness doctrine, with weak hand McCain has with judges after his “Gang of 14” stunt, I don’t expect him to do so well with the FCC.

    John McCain is OK with states having “Hate crimes” laws, but they are all unconstitutional, he won’t say that. They all violate equal protection, because if a Black man shoots me and calls me the N-word it’s OK, but if a White man does it, hate crime. That’s unequal.

    But if McCain wins I’ll be proven right.

    McCain’s YouTube Problem Just Became a Nightmare

Independent Conservative - Copyright 2008 - Copyright Notice

[powered by WordPress.]

53 queries. 0.393 seconds