Replies

To: Netizen

You seem to miss the point about the taking of an innocent life vs. taking the life of a guilty murderer.

My point was consistency of principle.

Something you don't see, since emotions rule your world, or perhaps religious dogma.

Whatever it is, it is inconsistent.

592 posted on 03/01/2005 10:27:53 AM PST by Cold Heat (FR is still a good place to get the news and slap around an idiot from time to time.)

To: Cold Heat

My point was consistency of principle.

Your point was fallacious regarding TS. She is guilty of nothing.

You're point is right on if applied to SCOTUS, they are hypocrites writ large.

600 posted on 03/01/2005 10:33:13 AM PST by jwalsh07

To: Cold Heat

"My point was consistency of principle."

Consistency of principle (valuing human life) demands that a high price be paid for those who purposefully end a human life without good cause.

606 posted on 03/01/2005 10:37:02 AM PST by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)

To: Cold Heat

I am consistent. Protect innocent life. A muderer isn't innocent.

656 posted on 03/01/2005 11:39:45 AM PST by Netizen (jmo)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794