Obama disagrees with high court on child rape case

[kevinmc]

CHICAGO- Democrat Barack Obama said Wednesday he disagrees with the Supreme Court's decision outlawing executions of child rapists.

"I have said repeatedly that I think that the death penalty should be applied in very narrow circumstances for the most egregious of crimes," Obama said at a news conference. "I think that the rape of a small child, 6 or 8 years old, is a heinous crime and if a state makes a decision that under narrow, limited, well-defined circumstances the death penalty is at least potentially applicable that that does not violate our Constitution."

The court's 5-4 decision Wednesday struck down a Louisiana law that allows capital punishment for people convicted of raping children under 12, saying it violates the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment........

[Sequoia]

1. But waterboard the hell away.

Okay, since we can't ice them just cut off body parts.

[smoogatz]

2. I think in cases where serial rape is clearly established through DNA

testing, he might have a point. Sexual predators who target young children are the worst of the worst.

[Median Democrat]

3. Agree

I am not a fan of the death penalty, but I am not about to say that child rape is less heinous than cold blooded murder.

[Triana]

60. I agree with you and Obama - where there is DNA evidence...

...the death penalty could be appropriate in child rape cases. I figure these psychopaths/sickos are not rehabitable and why keep them locked up for life - or let them out and let them do it again?

[Jakes Progress]

124. So I guess you believe that every raped child should be killed.

That is the reality upshot of your point of view. With a mandatory death sentence, these disgusting perverts would have every incentive to kill every one of their victims.

[smoogatz]

133. That's such a bizarre and stupid statement

I'm not going to bother formulating a response. Except to ignore you.

[Jakes Progress]

138. Bizarre and stupid would be not listening

to the people who know about these things. Sure it might feel viscerally good to wreak vengeance, but if the rapist knows that the living child will be the only thing to convict him of a crime with a mandatory death penalty, he knows that it is in his best interest to kill that witness.

Bizarre and stupid is believing that your sense of gritty justice is more important than the life of the child.

[Labors of Hercules]

146. That's a bit of an over-the-top argument...

Do you have any evidence that this would be the case? Any case history perhaps that would suggest that perpetrators would be more predisposed toward murdering a child specifically to avoid a potential death sentence as opposed to life in prison?

[Jakes Progress]

148. This is exactly why they altered

the LIndberg Laws. Those in the law enforcement field agree that a mandatory sentence would increase rape and kidnap victim deaths.

[Labors of Hercules]

149. That was a mandatory sentence. The issue wasn't the application

of the death penalty under overtly egregious circumstances, it was that the sentence was applied unilaterally.

and even then the argument that it would increase rape and kidnap victim deaths was not adequately substantiated by the facts.

[Jakes Progress]

155. The argument is adequately substantiated enough

to sway most law enforcement officials and the ACLU and rape crisis counselors. The only purpose served by the DP is revenge and is gut oriented.

[Midlodemocrat]

4. I am very disappointed in this.

The death penalty has no place in a civilized society. None at all. No excuses.

[tbyg52]

9. Me too, but

if we're going to have it at all, I agree with Obama that child rape is at least as heinous as murder. That was a jaw-dropping decision, especially from *this* court.

[Midlodemocrat]

11. The Lindbergh law.

All that will occur is that a child who is raped has a greater chance of being murdered to avoid fingering the suspect.

It's a bad idea. Very bad.

At least the Lindbergh law was repealed of sorts in the 70s. This is essentially creating a new one.

[LostinVA]

17. Bingo

I'm against the DP for moral reasons, but this is a HUGE practical reason not to have the DP.

[Midlodemocrat]

20. Yup. First thing I thought of when I read the SCOTUS decision this morning.

I thought, Holy Crap, they are finally doing the right thing and not the rightwing thing.

[LostinVA]

32. Whenever I use the "practical reason" in arguments with pro-DP people

(including my wife), they always pause for a few seconds, realize I've made an important point, then say, "Yeah, but --"

[Midlodemocrat]

54. She's a freeper. I always knew it.

:rofl:

[LostinVA]

57. She at least got rid of the Freeper Mobile

Although she DOES have a Hillary sticker on her car.

[tbyg52]

21. I see your point.

It still really surprised me from this court. Haven't looked into their reasoning, as I just want the death penalty to go away altogether.

[Midlodemocrat]

23. As do I.

I cannot support the DP in any circumstance. It just creates more victims. And, spare me the 'closure' crapola. One of the releatives of a victim of the Oklahoma bombing stated that executing Timothy McVeigh didn't give him closure...forgiving him did. I completely agree.

[still_one]

36. Sorry, but statistics indicate that the child is usually killed anyone /nt

[Midlodemocrat]

41. I believe you mean, anyway and that is patently false.

Most children are raped by family members or friends, not strangers. Your statement is wrong.

[Jakes Progress]

125. Any research or links to go with that silly made up statistic? nt

[LiberalFighter]

71. What else will they expand the death penalty to include?

I wonder why they need to bother with including the DP for child rapists when the prison population could take care of that problem.

Or we could put the guy through therapy sessions that include shock treatments every time he thinks about child sex.

[Irishonly]

95. I Was Going To Post The Same

There would be no deterrent for the rapist to keep the child alive. At least now, they can give life. It will not serve children well at all.

[Withywindle]

136. Ugh, that's a painful case, and you're right.

I'm not at all opposed to the DP on moral-principle grounds. We have no problems with putting down rabid dogs that have harmed humans, and rabid humans who've damaged others irreparably (via rape or murder) are no different to me--worse even, because rabid animals truly have no choice, and humans always do. Dispose of them for good and the world is improved; fine by me! (the life of a human who has consciously chosen to kill another, and it can be absolutely proven? Toilet paper. Bye! *flush*)

But I'm against it in actual-practice reality because (a) conviction and enforcement has always historically been intractably classist and racist, and (b) the idea of it as a "deterrent" has exactly the effect you're talking about: those pieces of shit inclined to rape and kidnap and molest and rob might have an incentive to murder if they think it might save their own worse-than-worthless carcasses.

[LostinVA]

19. It split along idealogy lines -- 5-4

[Midlodemocrat]

24. No surprise there.

[LostinVA]

26. Nope -- although Super Catholic Scalia should ahve made it 6-3

But, we know he's a buffet Catholic, eh? Some life is more scared than others.

[Midlodemocrat]

28. IOW, only the pre-born.

:puke: He makes me hurl.

[woolldog]

43. I guess you consider Kennedy to be a liberal???

[LostinVA]

46. Yes, he certainly is on these type cases

Be gone.

[woolldog]

Get bent.

[gateley]

10. Agree. Totally against death penalty.

Although sometimes I wonder if it wouldn't actually be the most merciful sentence of all - some of these people are so tortured.

[Midlodemocrat]

I agree with your statement.

Life in prison is no picnic. Having worked at prisons in CT, :scared: Sure was enough to keep me on the straight and narrow, if you get my drift.

[Mass]

13. I agree, but Obama had already stated that he supported it in heinous crimes.So it is not a surprise

\nt

[Midlodemocrat]

15. It's not murder.

And it leaves the victim at risk of death because the sentence is obstensibly the same.

It's a mistake. Just like the Lindberg law was a mistake when it came to kidnappings.

[still_one]

16. Do you have kids? /nt

[Midlodemocrat]

18. 3. What's your point?

[still_one]

30. Because unless you have a child, and someone rapes that child, you have no idea

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

33. Has one of your kids ever raped a child?

Boy, this is a dumb argument.

[Midlodemocrat]

35. Well, I worked with several children who had been raped

so, yeah, I do.

Do you have a child who has been raped? Do you wish death on the person who committed the rape?

[still_one]

40. I would kill the SOB myself if that happened /nt

[Midlodemocrat]

42. You are making no sense at all in this thread.

None whatsoever.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

44. Sure you would, Rambo.

Then you'd feast on his flesh to gain his powers.

[Jakes Progress]

126. So you kill him and go to jail.

Then your raped child loses a parent. Really good thinking.

[JoFerret]

88. Crap argument.

We are better than that.

[Jakes Progress]

127. Would you rather that your child was killed

after they were raped? That is the result of the law you want passed.

[still_one]

14. Who says we are a civilized society? The only way I will agree with you premise is

if they can guarantee life without parole

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

29. If you want to be a barbarian, hang out somewhere else.

I hear Sharia law advocates execution for rape. Perhaps you'd fit in over in Saudi Arabia.

[Midlodemocrat]

47. Jeebus, Who would have thought Bornagain and I would be in agreement?

:rofl:

:thumbsup:

[JoFerret]

89. I have had the similar experience of shock and awe! n/t

.

[still_one]

52. Don't tell me where I can hang out or not bud /nt

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

53. Then start acting like a civilized grown-up.

It ain't hard.

[Colobo]

142. Feeding child rapists with tax dollars is not civilized. It's a waste of money.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

157. Uh, yeah, it is civilized.

Starving people death would be barbaric.

A civilization can be judged on how well it treats its prisoners.

This "lets torture prisoners" gitmo shit is so Sept. 12th, Katzen.

[terrya]

67. I completely, absolutely agree.

We are better than this. We are.

There is NO acceptable reason to use the death penalty. NONE.

I'm disappointed that our nominee would come out and say this.

[GihrenZabi]

72. Civilized...

What makes a civilized society is:

1) Allowing for an appeal of a capital conviction
2) Allowing for a specific appeal of the capital punishment
3) Executing quickly and as painlessly as possible

I don't see how "civilized" has to mean "suffering the continued existence of men and women willing to rape children, murder children, or butcher innocents."

A civilized society as the right to defend itself against those who attack it. From a prima facie deontological moral argument, capital punishment could be argued as a moral obligation...

[Midlodemocrat]

77. A moral obligation?

Are you for real or did I stumble into ProDeathPenaltyUnderground.com?

Take a look at the countries outside of the US who execute their countrymen and get back to me.

Jesus. I thought I've heard everything. :eyes:

[LostinVA]

96. Yemen, Iraq, USA....

[GihrenZabi]

110. Let me know...

...if you understand what prima facie moral philosophy is. When you do, we can talk.

Until then, go do some reading. Killing is not always wrong. Murder is always wrong.

Murder is killing someone for no reason.

Killing very often has a legitimate, or necessary, purpose. Sorry, but I live in the real world not some ideological fantasy where we all skip through fields of flowers and life is perfect. *rolls eyes*

[question everything]

83. Thank you, thank you for setting this discussion on the right course

I cannot believe all the DUers, who used to oppose death penalty, all of a sudden support it.

[Bucky]

5. Well, what did you expect? He's running for president.

Obviously the death penalty isn't going to deter these sick fucks who think they're above the law anyway. The same old death penalty problem applies--with a traumatized six year old witness and the "right" manipulative prosecutor more eager to bag a big conviction rather than convict the actual perpetrator, you can never be sure you're gassing the right guy. How many men did Illinois free off of death row 8 years ago?

But it's an election year and it's not like the president ends up deciding these cases anyway. It always ends up as a court's call. Bothersome, but understandable.

[JoFerret]

91. You are saying he was "cowed"?

I have no idea whether this is expedience in an election year or whether it is what he believes.
But is is very disappointing. Especially as there was/ is plenty of wriggle room on this one.

Mr.Tough Guy. My ass.

This was a move worthy of a republican.

[FourPieRun]

100. if he gets elected, isn't he going to have to run for *re-election?*

[IndianaJones]

6. good. nt.

[okieinpain]

7. betcha money hillary would disagree with the court also.

it would be political suicide to agree with the courts majority opinion. which is why I guess the court should be free to make decisions freely.

thank god for that at least.

and by the way I wouldn't have a hard time seeing someone get the death penalty for raping a child.

[Midlodemocrat]

48. No, it wouldn't.

Not at all. The Lindberg law was enacted for the same reason and discovered to be a very, very bad law. The suspect has absolutely NO incentive to keep the victim alive if he is going to get the same punishment if he is caught.

[crankychatter]

8. governor geo. bush fast-tracked executions - lots of them

you know damn well some were innocent

for my money, if obama wants to see a few of the most vile rapists executed?

compare, contrast, and live with it

[wyldwolf]

12. good.

[RichardRay]

22. There is nothing unconstitutional about the death penalty...

it's just wrong.

The Constitution governs what's legal; that's a different standard. Legal != Right, Legal != Fair, Legal just equals lawful.

[Midlodemocrat]

25. It certainly is.

Wrong on every level.

[Blue_In_AK]

27. No death penalty!

Lock him up for life, throw away the key, but the death penalty is wrong.

[cbayer]

31. The death penalty has no place in a civilized society.

The thought of using it to punish a crime in which there was not a death is even even more heinous.

I wonder if you looked into this case. There was just an interesting piece on it on ATC. Before anyone jumps to conclusions, it might behoove them to look at the detais of this particular case.

[LostinVA]

39. Link?

I've just seen the CNN.com type of coverage.

[cbayer]

69. Here is the NPR link.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91881288

The issue in this case is that the child changed her story. They also make the point that since most child rape is performed by family members, it is not reasonable to expect a child to testify against a parent who might be executed for the crime. You have to listen to the audio to hear the whole thing.

Don't get me wrong. Other than murder, rape of a child is the worst and most unforgivable crime I can imagine. I just can't find any justification for the death penalty.

[LostinVA]

74. Great -- thnaks

[FrenchieCat]

34. I am of mixed minds on this one.....

I don't wish death on anyone, but I do have children.

But I am pretty glad that Obama didn't hand the GOP a potential Dukakis problem, when they would ask him how would he feel if one of his daughters was raped (with Dukakis, I think it was his wife, if I can recall that far) in a debate. Cause had he agreed with the court's decision, that would have been the perfect setup by Stophopoloushit of ABC.

[Midlodemocrat]

37. All he would have had to do was reference the Lindbergh Law.

No one would have blinked an eye.

[still_one]

55. The lindberg law became law after they killed the kid /nt

[Midlodemocrat]

56. Do you know what it says?

That the punishment for kidnapping is the same as the punishment for murder. Tell me, what possible incentive does a suspect have to keep his victim alive if that is the case? Especially after the victim has seen/heard him or her?

I'll tell you. Zero. Zilch. None. Nada.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

58. Oh, come on.

I disappointed too, but I gotta admit that never would have happened.

[Midlodemocrat]

62. It certainly could have.

It's a bad law. And, the SCOTUS was right to strike it down. It's every bit as flawed as the Lindbergh law. Equating child rape with murder is essentially the same thing as equating kidnapping and 'hurting the child in the commission of the kidnapping' with murder.

It was considered a capital offense until the 70s. You are old enough to remember that. Do you remember Caryl Chessman?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

63. Of course it's a terrible law.

Damn good thing the SC struck it down.

But you don't think the media cares, do you?

[Midlodemocrat]

66. No, I don't.

My point is that I think Obama is dead wrong on this and he could easily have spun it using the Lindbergh law. He wouldn't have been 'Dukaskis'd' if he had.

Watching the terrified faces of parents who are begging for their child to be returned; imagine the scenario if there was essentially no way they were going to be returned because it presented too much danger to the suspect. It's too terrifying to contemplate.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

68. He's wrong on the issue, but there's no way he could have spun it.

Look at the dipshits in this thread.

[Midlodemocrat]

70. I think he could have.

He seems to have touched a nerve with so many Americans, I think he could have spun it.

At least I'd to think he could have, or at least tried.

This statement from him disappoints me a great deal.

[JoFerret]

85. Very disappointing. He did have wriggle room considering

SCOTUS.
And the bloodthirsty on this thread need some time to delve in the meaning of justice in a civil society.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

156. Relax, it's all politics.

You'll noticed he waited until after the court ruled this unconstitutional. This is the used car salesman stage of the campaign season. Obama's record is very liberal on the death penalty, and I've no doubt he really does agree with the Supreme Court.

[GihrenZabi]

38. Very glad to hear him say this

I acknowledge all the faults and failures of the American system of capital punishment...but Neil Entwistle was just found guilty of all charges in the murder of his wife and infant daughter here in Mass., and he cannot get the punishment he rightly deserves.

There ARE occasions where the death penalty is not only perfectly arguable, but from a prima facie deontological argument may even be morally obligatory. There are men and women who commit crimes which are beyond reproach, for which there is no justification - and they are not all committed by the poor, or disenfranchised, or those who cannot afford adequate legal representation such that the application of the death penalty becomes as problematic as it so often can be.

Most people will admit that there are actions a human being can take which make them "monstrous" or "inhuman" - what Obama calls "the most egregious of crimes." When someone ceases to be a human being in action or morality society owes them nothing - not even continued existence.

There are some crimes for which there is no redemption, and we ought to have the ability to remove their perpetrators from society such that said perpetrators will never, ever be given the chance to repeat their crime as happens far too often to be tolerable, understandable, or acceptable.

[Midlodemocrat]

45. Wrong. We should be working to abolish the death penalty, not cheering its application.

[GihrenZabi]

109. Pipe dream

The need for capital punishment will come to an end when there are no more rich or poor, no more mental illness, no more racism, sexism, homophobia...

Basically when hate and inequality cease to exist will the human conditions which lead humans to murder other humans possibly cease to exist.

Until then, I don't want to be spending money keeping child rapists and child murders and rapists and serial killers, none of whom have any place among the rest of us, alive in jail.

[Midlodemocrat]

143. Actually, due to the appeals process, it costs more to execute them.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

49. Boy, that's weird.

First you were trashing Obama for presumably disagreeing with the 4th amendment, now here you are disagreeing with the 8th.

[GihrenZabi]

116. No, actually...

Capital punishment is neither cruel nor unusual.

It is less cruel than throwing someone in prison to be ass-raped and go out of their minds. It is definitive and swift punishment.

And to call it unusual is ridiculous in the extreme.

[emilyg]

51. I'm with Obama on this.

[Jakes Progress]

128. So, like him, you don't think things through

or have any consideration for the victim?

[emilyg]

134. What????

[Jakes Progress]

139. Read through all of the posts here.

You will find a number of people who understand that the life of the child is at more risk with a mandatory death penalty.

Those against this make two arguments. First is that if the rapist knows that the living child is the only thing that can convict him of a DP crime, it is in his best interest to kill the witness. Second is the number of people who work with these kinds of cases. Very often the chile of eight though twelve or thirteen will hesitate to testify because they know they will be killing the rapist. Many children don't feel right about this. Some talk about kids who have spent years getting through the trauma of both the rape and the idea that they killed someone.

Retribution is one thing. It is gut wrenchingly satisfying, but it doesn't solve the problem of getting more of these perverts out of society. Live in prison as a child rapist is not a light sentence. What happens to these men is awful and justly deserved. The more surviving witnesses, the more go away.

That is thinking it through.

[Triana]

61. 100% agreed. n/t

[Blondiegrrl]

64. Excellent post. I agree.

I've always been in favor of capital punishment. That's pretty much my only non-liberal viewpoint.

[LostinVA]

65. "Morally obligatory" -- oh boy

First time I've ever heard this argument from a Pro-DPer.

:rofl:

[GihrenZabi]

111. Example given:

A man has his hand on a detonator. The detonator will set off explosives which will kill hundreds of people.

You have a shotgun in your hands. At the range at which you will fire the weapon, this man with his hand on the detonator will assuredly die.

Deontology: you do what is right because it is right, and it is your obligation to do what is right.
Prima facie deontology: sometimes one thing is more right than another, and one obligation supercedes another.

It is wrong to kill.
It is wrong to allow others to be killed.

Proposition #2 supercedes Proposition #1.

So you pull the trigger on your shotgun and kill the man with the detonator, and your action is not only morally correct, but was also your obligation. Otherwise, you are just as complicit in the murders of those hundreds of people because you had the ability to prevent them and did absolutely nothing.

Or, from a utilitarian moral position: that which causes the most pleasure and the least pain is that which is right.

In this case, which causes the least pain: your killing the man with the detonator, or your allowing him to trigger the explosives?

Again, killing the man with the detonator is morally correct.


We don't live in a perfect world. We live in a horribly messy world filled with evil people seeking to do harm on others.

Sometimes you have to kill those people to save the lives of others. If you want to argue that murderers, rapists, child molesters and the like NEVER go to jail, get out, and repeat their crimes, then and only then do you have a leg to stand on.

Otherwise, capital punishment prevents the crime from ever taking place again, which is the point.

Anti-DP people like to talk about how unfair the system is, how racist it is - which is true. But that means the response is not to abolish the death penalty, but to shore up the laws which govern its use.

Anti-DP like to talk about how the DP isn't a deterrent - but the legal system isn't about deterring anything. Your moral upbringing and socialization is about deterring crime, but once you step over that line the legal system is about delivering justice.

NOTE: Yes, this is a ridiculously improbable situation, but it is also how you argue moral proofs, by hypothetical examples to test the moral argument...

[LostinVA]

117. Keeping the murderer in jail for the rest of his life will ensure he doesn't kill again

As for the guy holding a detonator, take him out. I have no problem with killing in self-defense.

[Marrah_G]

144. One tiny disagreement

It should read: Keeping the murderer in jail for the rest of his life will ensure he doesn't kill any besides prison staff or other inmates.

Now if we would stop putting people in jail for petty non-violent crimes, MAYBE we would have the resources to properly contain those people who murder others.

[GihrenZabi]

145. So -

We have established that you do not, in principle, object to the killing of another human being under the right circumstances. Good. This is progress. :)

Unfortunately, in our system, murderers don't always get kept in jail for the rest of their lives. Much as one might argue for putting a moratorium on the death penalty until the racist fashion in which it is applied is dealt with through new laws and strictures on its application, one could argue that the fact that murderers and rapists DO get out of the prison to commit the same crime again means we should not abolish the death penalty yet until we have new laws and strictures on the application of prison time to prevent them from ever getting out again, as there does exist one sure-fire way to prevent this event: executing the criminal.

[Owl]

50. Good.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

59. Yeah, he's a centrist.

Totally not surprised. A little saddened, a little disgusted, but not surprised.

[cbc5g]

73. Centrists win .. ask Bill Clinton, hes the only Dem we've had as President in 3 decades

When 90+% of Americans don't support the Supreme Court decision it is political suicide to support it. They'd push the Dukakis ads on him. "Obama supports a decision against the Death Penalty for a CHILD RAPIST". While I agree the death penalty is wrong...this is America and we are a representative government by the people, and the people are against the SCOTUS decision.

[FourPieRun]

101. where were you during the primaries?? nt

[question everything]

75. So why bother voting for him?

The main reason is to appoint the next Justices. But if he agrees with Scalia and Thomas instead of Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer - why bother?

A desire for spilled blood is not becoming.

[dailykoff]

78. Hey I thought you liked this centrist stuff?

Just politics right?

[question everything]

81. Most people do not fit a set of pigeon holes that others choose for them

the sooner you realize this, the less disappointments you will meet in your life.

[dailykoff]

84. I'd rather reserve the death penalty for the genocidal murderers

in the WH, and it won't happen if we bury their crimes, which this FISA bill does.

[dailykoff]

76. Fine, let him demagogue on a done deal. Leave the Constitution the hell alone.

Sickening, but at least he's not voting on it.

[Midlodemocrat]

79. That's a good point.

I am, however, disappointed in his statement.

[Thrill]

80. Good Move by Obama. The Repukes were just ready to Dukakis him with something like this

[FourPieRun]

102. so what else should he move right on? nt

[mentalsolstice]

82. This is more disappointing than FISA

As for the DP, my heart and mind are in constant conflict, but my mind always wins, and I'm against "an eye for an eye." My heart is always heavy when a crime is committed against a child. I'm a rape response volunteer, however, the victims I work with are 13 y.o. plus. Most of them walk away with minor physical injuries, but talk to any of them and you know they have years of mental healing ahead of them. One rape I responded to, the victim/survivor was left for dead, the perp thought he had strangled her to death, he didn't, but it was a wonder that she didn't freeze to death before she regained consciousness. That case is forever seared on my heart. Yet, my mind still is against the DP.

With my volunteer work with rape victims, and my previous experience legally representing domestic violence victims, I'm well aware of the cruelties that people can perpetuate on others. I'm with LostinVA, as I've seen too many cases where the victim would have been killed if the perp(s) thought that was the only way (s)he could get away with his/her crime.

[LostinVA]

97. Great post, my friend!

[mentalsolstice]

106. Check your PM

[LostinVA]

107. You little tease

There's nothing there. The last PM I have is from Midlo.

[mentalsolstice]

122. I'm slow....check your pm.

[mentalsolstice]

129. I don't know where my PM is, It's floating around DU. nt

[rug]

86. The Defendant has an IQ of 70.

Alto, Scalia, Roberts and Thomas are not good company.

[goldcanyonaz]

87. He has never been against the death penalty, no surprise there

[papapi]

90. Wow. I don't know about this. I've been torn. . .

for years now about the death penalty. I wrote a senior thesis contrasting the pros and cons of the death penalty. That was a long time ago and I still can't decide if I should support it or not support it.

Most of what I read about it, then and now, is so biased in one direction or the other that it's difficult to draw any conclusions.

For now, I'll continue to oppose the death penalty, but this won't change my decision to support Obama.

[BklynChick]

92. The death penalty is always wrong.

[GihrenZabi]

113. Prove it N/T

[BklynChick]

150. you can't prove morality

[JoFerret]

93. The death penalty is RACIST.

Not to mention ineffective and expensive.

[GihrenZabi]

114. Wrong argument

The racism of the death penalty is not an argument for its abolition, but an argument for changing the laws by which capital punishment is meted out.

[JoFerret]

118. RIGHT argument

for while we are waiting for such reforms to take place.

It's actually a parallel argument urging the short term moratorium while we work toward full abolition.

[Hippo_Tron]

94. Lets not forget that Obama will appoint the kind of justices that voted the right way on this one

Yes I think the death penalty is disgusting but Obama is running for president of a country where the death penalty is very popular. Federal executions are also extremely rare so his position on it is more than likely a moot point in terms of what he will do as president. The best way to fight the death penalty is on the state level and through the courts.

In summary, on the issue that will actually make a difference in death penalty policy (judges) Obama is 100% correct. Given that I can excuse his pro death penalty rhetoric.

[Skip Intro]

98. I've never understood the logic for the death penalty. Makes no sense.

I know this case is not about murder, but ususally the death penalty is applied in cases of murder.

But please, how does this make sense:

Taking of life is wrong, therefore killing is wrong, therefore we will kill you for your crimes

???

Makes us no better than the criminal.

Makes us criminal.

[FourPieRun]

99. i'm shocked; shocked, i tell you. not. nt

[Phoonzang]

103. If saying that helps him win, then I say good.

I care about winning, not all these little issues where he doesn't agree with the very liberal population here and elsewhere on the Internets. No candidate is going to agree with us completely. Otherwise he wouldn't have a chance of winning.

Like Kucinich. :hide:

[Jakes Progress]

130. Your moral stance is appalling.

And there is absolutely nothing in recent history to shore up your argument that he stands a better chance of winning by acting like a republican. That's the kind of behavior that has cost us so many elections. We win when we stand for something.

I don't know which is the worse though. That he thinks the death penalty is a good thing or that he just says it for political favor.

[ccharles000]

104. Obama is wrong on this issue.

[Straight Shooter]

105. I support the death penalty in theory.

But in reality, the way the DP is applied, I don't support it. Too much wiggle room for error. When the law becomes equal in applying adequate defense of all who are accused, as well as administration of penalties, when justice truly is blind as to who the defendant is, then I'll unequivocally support it.

The death penalty seems to have no effect on stopping people from committing other crimes. IIRC, Ted Bundy moved from a non-DP state to a DP state, where he then committed most of his crimes. But in his case, he probably figured he'd never get caught and the risk added to the "thrill."

I don't know what goes through a perpetrator's mind who decides to rape a child, whether they would restrain themselves from killing the victim or not. Anyone who brutally rapes a child is out of control anyway. Molestation and incest seem to be separate issues from the type of crime Obama probably has in mind.

It's a very touchy subject, no matter on which side you stand.

[depakid]

108. It would be interesting to see him defend his legal rationale for this

after all, he is a constitutional law lecturer- so presumably he has some opinions on the applicability of the 8th Amendment and also some reasons why the earlier 1977 case of Coker v. Georgia was wrongly decided (Coker outlawed the death penalty for rape).

Might also be interesting for him to defend the slippery slope his doctrine implies.

For example, what other crimes might a state impose the death penalty for other than murder?

Perhaps physicians who "commit" abortions, like his buddy Tom Coburn from Oklahoma advocates?

No logical reason why not after Roe is overturned, provided that most people of the state consider that act to be heinous.

[tabasco]

112. Obama does not need to defend his "legal rationale."

He is not a judge, constrained by precedent. He is a politician, giving his opinion how it oughta be.

Obama is consistently pro-choice, so your other statement is absurd.

[depakid]

120. He certainly doesn't need to defend anything to people who don't think

and would support him no matter what he said or did.

Kinda like Bush supporters.

Bottom line: Obama touts his experience as a constitutional law lecturer, so it's MORE THAN fair game for anyone to question his rationale on a critical constitutional question.

Moreover, it's everyone's business to know how a politician especially one who wants to be president would apply capital punishment- particularly if he comes out in favor of expanding it's application to other crimes- beyond the bright line of of taking a life.

How far could a state go? The federal government?

Reckon I'd like to know....

[tabasco]

121. Stupid people always think they are smarter than everyone else.

Obama was not asked what his decision would be as a judge. He was asked his opinion on the matter.

You apparently believe that a person's opinion has to be based on legal precedent. That's not correct. A person is quite able to have an opinion different than the law.

Obama also believes marijuana should be decriminalized. So do I. Just because the law says one thing doesn't mean you have to agree with it. The only law specifically outlawing capital punishment for rape is judge-made law. Obama has every right to disagree with it.

Of course it is fair for someone to ask him the hypothetical ("is the decision correct based on precedent?") but that's not what he was asked. He was asked his personal opinion on the matter.

Take your airs of intelligence somewhere else. F*** off with your "Bush follower" bullshit. It is more like a Bush supporter to think that a person is not free to disagree with the law.

[Jakes Progress]

131. I can see why you don't like arguing with smart people. nt

[depakid]

158. Impressive, isn't it?

It's to the point where it's hard to have a rational, analytical debate about policy (or god forbid law) with some folks in America if you in any way one seems to impugn their candidate or pResident.

Kinda sad, really.

[Marie26]

115. So he's more conservative than the Supreme Court? nt

[theboss]

119. You know, I honestly didn't know his position on the death penalty

This is surprising.

It's not a make or break issue for me, but it's disappointing.

[FrenchieCat]

123. Who was the last President who was against the death Penalty?

[mvd]

135. I knew it from before, but still was surprised about..

his disagreement with the ruling. Not shocked, but surprised. One reason I'm against the DP is because of enforcement. Ok, child rape to me is as grotesque a crime as murder, even though it is less final. But why set a limit at age 12? Arbitrary things get in the way, and then there is the issue of fair enforcement.

Obama really is about as weakly pro-death penalty as most serious Presidential candidates get, though. I don't believe I could enforce the federal law. So right now, I'd have a problem, while Obama does not.

[Forkboy]

132. Too bad, the death penalty is 100% wrong.

[mvd]

137. Hi, Forkboy!

Still, McCain is much more for it. That's the positive. :hi:

[Forkboy]

140. I know.

I'm just dead set against it (no pun intended), in all cases. I know what they're trying to do to Obama, and I understand why he's responding the way he is, and why he's always taken the position he does.

I just hate it. x(

Trust me...I'll always be aware of how much worse McCain is, on every damn issue. :)

[Democratic Lawyer]

141. I am against the State killing someone in my name

The State = the People

[olkaz]

147. Wow, I completely disagree with Obama here.

Is this another one of those triangulation things?

Ugh.

[snooper2]

151. Thank You Mr. Obama

Thank you very much for stating this...

Some humans are just fucking rabid and need to be put down. This fucker raped and brutalized a little child and people think he can be "reformed" or "we are civilized, put him in a cage for life"...

Fuck that shit...don't even waste a bullet or poison, just slit the bastards throat and drop him in an un-marked grave...

[Dbdmjs1022]

152. Said it before, say it again - I'm with Obama here. And not just because it's his view

I've always felt that, in certain situations, the death penalty is warranted. I also think that raping a child is just as heinous as murdering someone, and if there's incontrovertible evidence that the person is guilty, I think the death penalty should be an option.

[4themind]

153. I've been with Obama, but

I'm not with him on this. While he and others will debate whether this acceptable as a constitutional matter, my beliefs and morals as an individual citizen repel me from agreeing with such a law. I understand politically why obama would take this position (and he may genuinely feel this way) but I don't share his stance for this particular issue. Oh and I'll save some other people the extra seconds
"You're concern is noted"

[shayes51]

154. So what about...

Someone who beats up little kids? That's pretty bad!
Someone who abuses old people? That's terrible!
Someone who rapes a mentally challenged person? That's awful!
You see, trying to apply the death penalty in "very narrow circumstances for the most egregious crimes" just does not work. Many crimes are egregious. Who decides?

[jus_the_facts]

159. He's correct...they should be TERMINATED from existence.