Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[kidcarter8]

We have many more children awaiting adoption than we have parents waiting to adopt, Kid.


Not so much the infants

UNO also erred when he said the "man and the woman have the right to decide..."

Nope.  Man cant make the woman have the baby - even if it is half his.  True?

And more to the point - woman can abort without man's sig.

[josh]

We have many more children awaiting adoption than we have parents waiting to adopt, Kid.


Not so much the infants

Citation?

And even if so, assuming you are not claiming all infants are adopted, what do you suppose happens to them?

[josh]

https://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2021/01/02/cheerleaders-first-amendment-case-could-go-to-scotus.cnn

Should schools be allowed to punish students for their off-campus speech? Or does the 1st Amendment protect such speech?

Does it vary depending on what was said or how it was said or is it an absolute, one way or the other?

[Hamilton Samuels]

Here's an interesting one, heading to the SCOTUS:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/cheerleaders-vulgar-message-prompts-first-131037750.html

Social Media has led to tremendous amounts of social bullying, and that is a huge problem in schools, especially in an age where suicides have greatly increased among teens.

Schools want to be able to extend their campuses, virtually, too.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2021/01/02/cheerleaders-first-amendment-case-could-go-to-scotus.cnn

Should schools be allowed to punish students for their off-campus speech? Or does the 1st Amendment protect such speech?

Does it vary depending on what was said or how it was said or is it an absolute, one way or the other?

Sounds familiar, Josh.

I think schools have a responsibility to create a safe environment for learning. Now that virtual school is becoming a norm, that challenge will certainly get to be more difficult. I think it might depend on where it was said.

Do we want the government moderating student's speech off-campus? Not me.

Don't think schools have a vested interest in doing so, unless they can prove that they are doing so to stop an assault---and even then, the police would have to be involved with that---4th amendment issues, seem to arise as much as 1st, when you think about it.

But I'm not a lawyer. So it will be interesting to see how this case is argued.

[josh]

Here's an interesting one, heading to the SCOTUS:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/cheerleaders-vulgar-message-prompts-first-131037750.html

Social Media has led to tremendous amounts of social bullying, and that is a huge problem in schools, especially in an age where suicides have greatly increased among teens.

Schools want to be able to extend their campuses, virtually, too.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/tv/2021/01/02/cheerleaders-first-amendment-case-could-go-to-scotus.cnn

Should schools be allowed to punish students for their off-campus speech? Or does the 1st Amendment protect such speech?

Does it vary depending on what was said or how it was said or is it an absolute, one way or the other?

Sounds familiar, Josh.

I think schools have a responsibility to create a safe environment for learning. Now that virtual school is becoming a norm, that challenge will certainly get to be more difficult. I think it might depend on where it was said.

Do we want the government moderating student's speech off-campus? Not me.

Don't think schools have a vested interest in doing so, unless they can prove that they are doing so to stop an assault---and even then, the police would have to be involved with that---4th amendment issues, seem to arise as much as 1st, when you think about it.

But I'm not a lawyer. So it will be interesting to see how this case is argued.

Yes, the same case. I think I even responded to yours, though I would have to look. I think I discussed a prior SCOTUS case involving a kid and his Bongs 4 Jesus sign - which came down against the kid, as it was a school sponsored event (going to the parade) and the sign was ostensibly promoting illegal drug use (pretty questionable).

This one, as the girl points out, was not a school event nor was she wearing anything with the school's name on it.

Bullying, as you pointed out, is a big problem - on line and off. Schools have seldom been very good at responding to it even when it was taking place in their hallways and classrooms (nor have teachers been exempt from being the bullies). I don't know that having 'policing' power over social media conduct is going to lead to greater effectiveness on the school's part.

This is not obviously a response to the legal question, though as ever the dictum against having laws you cannot enforce comes to mind.

Legally, defining bullying (or harassment, for that matter) is problematic, but the harassment guideline is not a bad one and it may be that we "just" need to bring it down to that level, much as I cringe at that notion. Making the place a hostile environment should not be permitted. I just think the school probably needs to be reporter, not enforcer, as you suggested.

[Oilcandide]

“This is a story about a woman who is profoundly mentally ill as a result of a lifetime of torture and sexual violence,” said Sandra Babcock, faculty director of the Cornell Center on the Death Penalty Worldwide and a consultant to Montgomery’s legal team. “Lisa is not the worst of the worst – she is the most broken of the broken.”   

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/05/lisa-montgomery-death-row-execution-history

What would her execution accomplish? 

[kidcarter8]

Some sense of closure for the family of the victim.

[Hamilton Samuels]

“This is a story about a woman who is profoundly mentally ill as a result of a lifetime of torture and sexual violence,” said Sandra Babcock, faculty director of the Cornell Center on the Death Penalty Worldwide and a consultant to Montgomery’s legal team. “Lisa is not the worst of the worst – she is the most broken of the broken.”   

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/05/lisa-montgomery-death-row-execution-history

What would her execution accomplish?

Lisa Montgomery fatally strangled a pregnant woman, Bobbie Jo Stinnett, cut open her body, and kidnapped her baby. In December 2004, as part of a premeditated murder-kidnap scheme, Montgomery drove from her home in Kansas to Stinnett’s home in Missouri, purportedly to purchase a puppy.  Once inside the residence, Montgomery attacked and strangled Stinnett—who was eight months pregnant—until the victim lost consciousness.  Using a kitchen knife, Montgomery then cut into Stinnett’s abdomen, causing her to regain consciousness.  A struggle ensued, and Montgomery strangled Stinnett to death.  Montgomery then removed the baby from Stinnett’s body, took the baby with her, and attempted to pass it off as her own.  Montgomery subsequently confessed to murdering Stinnett and abducting her child.  In October 2007, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri found Montgomery guilty of federal kidnapping resulting in death, and unanimously recommended a death sentence, which the court imposed.  Her conviction and sentence were affirmed on appeal, and her request for collateral relief was rejected by every court that considered it.  Montgomery is scheduled to be executed by lethal injection on December 8, 2020, at U.S. Penitentiary Terre Haute, Indiana.

It would affirm the jury's decision.

As it should.

[carlos123]

I still see the similarity between death penalty and homicide, i. e., both involve death by violence.

And how do you feel about abortion?

Ambivalent, and you?

But I would not think of imposing my opinion on a woman by penalizing her if she chose to do something I find hard to accept.

Looks like only Bo and I have nuanced opinions on the DP.

Magister dixit.

NO issues with abortion on demand. I always find it weird and inconsistent that someone would be pro-life and support the DP, as so many do.

Same with the the pro-abortion crowd who scream about not wanting to take a life of someone who has murdered, raped, abetted murder and rape and is committed to doing so.

A woman and her mate have a right to decide if they want to end a pregnancy, without the government's interference, and the government has a definite responsibility to protect the public from further predation by those convicted of heinous murder.

Your opinion on the DP doesn't really seem nuanced, but you choose to say it is, so good for you.

Snark doesn't become you, carlos.

Bottom line, there are truly evil people, proven to be evil, and showing they'd like to continue to perpetrate that evil. If we have perfectly show that to be the case, such as in the likes of the Ted Bundys of the world, there is no need to keep them above ground.

There shouldn't be an automatic DP, IMO. And prosecutors make mistakes---but not in cases like those I detailed before.

I'd also like to eliminate the concept of prosecutors being elected to their positions. They should be concerned with enforcing the law, and only enforcing the law.  Putting a political layer over that process clouds judgement and creates incentives to seek wins over justice, to promote body counts over counting on equal protection before the law.
 
Abortion is a personal choice and should remain so, but it ends a potential life---a life that was given by the parents, and one they should be able to prenatally end, if they know that they can't afford to, for economic or other reasons, provide for that child.



That is nuanced. And it's been clearly articulated.

We haven't really gotten that kind of clarity from your expressions on these subjects.

But I am willing to wait until perhaps your zealotry fades a bit, either through time or perhaps after you garner more education on the true nature of man.

I have not checked this forum for a while.

Only to find upon return that you keep going back to the same arguments, plus some condescending assessment of my positions, talk about snark!

This discussion with you has become an unending circular run. I give up, you've exhausted me!

[kidcarter8]

Impossible issue...

May she rest in peace.

[barton]

This discussion with you has become an unending circular run. I give up, you've exhausted me!

Welcome to the Internet!      

[bodiddley]

I was rewatching the film Precious last week.  And the unrelentingly harsh backstory and family life of Clarice Precious is fairly similar to what Lisa Montgomery endured growing up.  Early and periodic incestuous rapes, beatings, etc. 

The crime Montgomery committed almost screams Mental Illness.  She'd actually been involuntarily sterilized a few years earlier, so the mysterious sudden arrival of a baby was an obvious red flag.

[Hamilton Samuels]

Try not to lose sleep over it.

[barton]

While I might not grieve for LM,  it's worth asking if the state should be killing the mentally ill.   Is it worth saving the taxpayers money for lifetime room/board in a maximum security facility,  if we cross that line?   It's one thing to execute someone who is capable of being morally responsible -- we can argue that they had sufficiently free will to choose a different course of action.   Did LM have the cognitive capacity to choose otherwise,  or understand the moral implication of her choice?   If no,  then the criminal may be the adult(s) who made her this way.   

[Hamilton Samuels]

While I might not grieve for LM,  it's worth asking if the state should be killing the mentally ill.   Is it worth saving the taxpayers money for lifetime room/board in a maximum security facility,  if we cross that line?   It's one thing to execute someone who is capable of being morally responsible -- we can argue that they had sufficiently free will to choose a different course of action.   Did LM have the cognitive capacity to choose otherwise,  or understand the moral implication of her choice?   If no,  then the criminal may be the adult(s) who made her this way.

Is the world safer with her or without her?