British man told of execution fate in China

[Aslan]

Torn on this one
Only posting a part, it's a bit long



British man condemned to die in China tomorrow morning has been told of his fate, campaigners confirmed today .

Akmal Shaikh, 53, who supporters say has a mental illness, is due to be executed at 10.30am local time for smuggling 4kg (8.8lb) of heroin, but was unaware of his death sentence until today.

Sally Rowen, legal director of the campaign group Reprieve, said Shaikh, who is in a secure hospital, had been told this morning. "The Chinese authorities had always said they would tell him 24 hours ahead," she said.

The family have filed a last-minute petition for a stay of execution and an application for special pardon to the supreme court, the Chinese president, Hu Jintao, and the standing committee of the People's National Congress, Rowen said, adding that there was still hope of a reprieve. She said: "Reprieves have been granted when people were literally on the way to their execution. Until we actually hear the reports that he has been executed, we are still hopeful that he won't."

Campaigners say Shaikh has bipolar disorder. There were two likely methods of execution, lethal injection or a single bullet, but as the former minicab operator from north London was being held in a hospital the former was more likely, she said.

Rowen confirmed that Shaikh's family had visited him for about an hour and a half and delivered written messages from other family members. "The whole family is finding it very stressful, and have become ill as a result," she said. "Tonight is going to be horrendous for them."

His daughter Leilla Horsnell said she was not optimistic that the petition would succeed, telling the BBC: "I'd like to be hopeful, but time just seems to be running out."

The Chinese have kept her father's fate from him until 24 hours before the scheduled execution on "humanitarian grounds". Horsnell said she thought this was a good thing "because I don't even think he would understand because we don't know how much his mental state has deteriorated."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/28/akmal-shaikh-execution-china

[battery jackson]

china sucks. they do it alllllllllllllllllll wroooonngggggg

[ImmortalOne]

china sucks. they do it alllllllllllllllllll wroooonngggggg

I don't know... there are these child murderers who we should ship over there for their death row sentences.

[battery jackson]

I don't know... there are these child murderers who we should ship over there for their death row sentences.

well of course. but all the other things they do are so incredibly detestable that i wouldnt feel comfortable deferring to them under any circumstance. i don't think we need to outsource execution. we need to stop being a bunch of hippies and learn how to do it ourselves.

[Aslan]

Here's my thing. I don't trust China. Most favored nation my ass.
I think they should send him home and let the UK (his homeland) deal with him

[ImmortalOne]

Here's my thing. I don't trust China. Most favored nation my ass.
I think they should send him home and let the UK (his homeland) deal with him

Well we all know that China is doing what no other country was able to do to the USA...

1.) Cripple the economy
2.) Kill citizens from the inside out (with products)

[Athena]

Well we all know that China is doing what no other country was able to do to the USA...

1.) Cripple the economy
2.) Kill citizens from the inside out (with products)

Some might argue Mexico's done the same. :tongue2:

Re: Malq's Eye for an Eye thread...

They KILL people in China for drug smuggling and/or manufacturing. And how's China's drug market? Alive and well.

No punishment deters, necessarily, which is why we must quit judging potential sentencing by its deterrent abilities and only consider what is reasonable and economical.

But China won't get that any time soon, and neither will we, unfortunately.

[ImmortalOne]

Some might argue Mexico's done the same. :tongue2:

Re: Malq's Eye for an Eye thread...

They KILL people in China for drug smuggling and/or manufacturing. And how's China's drug market? Alive and well.

No punishment deters, necessarily, which is why we must quit judging potential sentencing by its deterrent abilities and only consider what is reasonable and economical.

But China won't get that any time soon, and neither will we, unfortunately.

I kinda like the idea that Lestat had in Blood Canticles (sp) --- A drug that is legal and harmless but still does the same as all the illegal ones needs to be developed lol.

[malq]

Check this article.
Basically China executed this guy after 1/2 hour trial for smuggling 9 lbs of heroin around China.
China is being called on the carpet to explain their actions.
why should they?
Defiant China claim 'no one has right' to comment on its judicial sovereignty.
I agree with this 100%.

and lol at the protesters around the Chinese embassy in London. :Akmal is bipolar"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1238454/Akmal-Shaikh-Briton-executed-Chinese-firing-squad-body-returned.html

[Nell]

I read the other thread on this. While i feel for the guy and his family he chose to smuggle heroin into fucking China! I would never, cause if you are caught you know what will happen. Those Chinese do not fuck around.

[malq]

I read the other thread on this. While i feel for the guy and his family he chose to smuggle heroin into fucking China! I would never, cause if you are caught you know what will happen. Those Chinese do not fuck around.

Yeah I duped Aslan, sorry I missed that.
http://www.dreamindemon.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29072&highlight=china+execution

[biteme]

If you commit a crime in another country their laws apply, if you don't like it don't go.
I have no issues with killing drug dealers/smugglers, their chosen line of work is a cause of abuse and death in others they destroy lives.

[malq]

No punishment deters, necessarily,

That is the craziest thing I have ever heard. No punishment deters?
Is that the basis of all DP arguments? Why punish anyone? feel free to explain that if you will.


and what does this mean?

we must quit judging potential sentencing by its deterrent abilities and only consider what is reasonable and economical.

That sounds like a broad sweep of nothing if I ever heard it. If I have to guess, you are saying whatever we agree to and whatever we can afford.
Its kinda like that management course principle, 'whatever works'. use that for every answer on the test.


In this threads case, my question is, who are we to throw our beliefs on the dp and crime and punishment in general on China? We do our dumbass thing and wrap the death penalty system in red tape so bad with ridiculous arguments we can't use it. They laugh at us, as we cover our mouths in horror for actually doing something about it. Its quite comical.

[Echo]

I ponder why Malq is so obsessed with executing people....but that is another thread entirely.

Why so bloodthirsty?

Anyway, what cracks me up is that it is usually the Christian right that is pro death penalty and pro life at the same time.

Thou shall not kill....remember?

Hypocrisy at its best. :sheep:

[Pazuzu]

I ponder why Malq is so obsessed with executing people....but that is another thread entirely.

Why so bloodthirsty?

Anyway, what cracks me up is that it is usually the Christian right that is pro death penalty and pro life at the same time.

Thou shall not kill....remember?

Hypocrisy at its best. :sheep:

As Dubya famously said, it's knowing the difference between innocent and guilty. :hmmmm:

[Pene784]

Anyway, what cracks me up is that it is usually the Christian right that is pro death penalty and pro life at the same time.

Why must you bring religion into this? We get it you think people who are Christian or Catholic are stupid and nonsensical and you the mighty atheist is superior.

[Echo]

Why must you bring religion into this? We get it you think people who are Christian or Catholic are stupid and nonsensical and you the mighty atheist is superior.

Please refrain from putting words in my mouth, my entire FAMILY is Catholic and I do not judge them nor do I feel superior to them or anyone else for that matter.

Does it bother you that the point that I made tends to ring true and is very hypocritical?

Try not to be so threatened by us Atheists, its really not necessary.

[Echo]

As Dubya famously said, it's knowing the difference between innocent and guilty. :hmmmm:

He can get back to me when he finally learns how to pronounce "nuclear."

I won't hold my breath. :lollypop:

[biteme]

Reality is what it is.

http://www.wesleylowe.com/cp.html#deter.

During the temporary suspension on capital punishment from 1972-1976, researchers gathered murder statistics across the country. In 1960, there were 56 executions in the USA and 9,140 murders. By 1964, when there were only 15 executions, the number of murders had risen to 9,250. In 1969, there were no executions and 14,590 murders, and 1975, after six more years without executions, 20,510 murders occurred rising to 23,040 in 1980 after only two executions since 1976. In summary, between 1965 and 1980, the number of annual murders in the United States skyrocketed from 9,960 to 23,040, a 131 percent increase. The murder rate -- homicides per 100,000 persons -- doubled from 5.1 to 10.2. So the number of murders grew as the number of executions shrank. Researcher Karl Spence of Texas A&M University said:

"While some [death penalty] abolitionists try to face down the results of their disastrous experiment and still argue to the contrary, the...[data] concludes that a substantial deterrent effect has been observed...In six months, more Americans are murdered than have killed by execution in this entire century...Until we begin to fight crime in earnest [by using the death penalty], every person who dies at a criminal's hands is a victim of our inaction."

[Echo]

Sigh.............Here we go again.

States Without the Death Penalty Have Better Record on Homicide Rates - A new survey by the New York Times found that states without the death penalty have lower homicide rates than states with the death penalty. The Times reports that ten of the twelve states without the death penalty have homicide rates below the national average, whereas half of the states with the death penalty have homicide rates above. During the last 20 years, the homicide rate in states with the death penalty has been 48% - 101% higher than in states without the death penalty. "I think Michigan made a wise decision 150 years ago," said the state's governor, John Engler, a Republican, referring to the state's abolition of the death penalty in 1846. "We're pretty proud of the fact that we don't have the death penalty." (New York Times, 9/22/00)

States Without the Death Penalty Fared Better Over Past Decade - In the past ten years, the number of executions in the U.S. has increased while the murder rate has declined. Some commentators have maintained that the murder rate has dropped because of the increase in executions (see, e.g., W. Tucker, "Yes, the Death Penalty Deters," Wall St. Journal, June 21, 2002). However, during this decade the murder rate in non-death penalty states has remained consistently lower than the rate in states with the death penalty.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/dete...r-murder-rates

[biteme]

Sigh.............Here we go again.

States Without the Death Penalty Have Better Record on Homicide Rates - A new survey by the New York Times found that states without the death penalty have lower homicide rates than states with the death penalty. The Times reports that ten of the twelve states without the death penalty have homicide rates below the national average, whereas half of the states with the death penalty have homicide rates above. During the last 20 years, the homicide rate in states with the death penalty has been 48% - 101% higher than in states without the death penalty. "I think Michigan made a wise decision 150 years ago," said the state's governor, John Engler, a Republican, referring to the state's abolition of the death penalty in 1846. "We're pretty proud of the fact that we don't have the death penalty." (New York Times, 9/22/00)

States Without the Death Penalty Fared Better Over Past Decade - In the past ten years, the number of executions in the U.S. has increased while the murder rate has declined. Some commentators have maintained that the murder rate has dropped because of the increase in executions (see, e.g., W. Tucker, "Yes, the Death Penalty Deters," Wall St. Journal, June 21, 2002). However, during this decade the murder rate in non-death penalty states has remained consistently lower than the rate in states with the death penalty.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/dete...r-murder-rates
repeat but true
It is what it is

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/states-and-without-death-penalty

Your avoiding the fact that a lot of the states had the death penalty till a few years ago and are now used in the no DP statistics, the reason the murder rates are down in those states in the last 20 years is because of the past 17 or so years of DP not the last few years of no DP
You can’t say DP is irreverent and use a period when the Death Penalty existed in a state, take those statistics ( hijack) give them to the state as a NO DP statistic and say see, DP is no better deterrent, DP was deterrent in decreased murders during the last 20 years and the stats prove it

[Echo]

repeat but true
It is what it is

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/states-and-without-death-penalty

Your avoiding the fact that a lot of the states had the death penalty till a few years ago and are now used in the no DP statistics, the reason the murder rates are down in those states in the last 20 years is because of the past 17 or so years of DP not the last few years of no DP
You can’t say DP is irreverent and use a period when the Death Penalty existed in a state, take those statistics ( hijack) give them to the state as a NO DP statistic and say see, DP is no better deterrent, DP was deterrent in decreased murders during the last 20 years and the stats prove it

Not true according the facts below.

STATES WITH THE DEATH PENALTY

Alabama
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Indiana
Illinois
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maryland
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
North Carolina
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon Pennsylvania
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Virginia
Washington
Wyoming

ALSO
- U.S. Gov't
- U.S. Military
STATES WITHOUT THE DEATH PENALTY (YEAR ABOLISHED IN PARENTHESES)
Alaska (1957)
Hawaii (1948)
Iowa (1965)
Maine (1887)
Massachusetts (1984)
Michigan (1846) Minnesota (1911)
North Dakota (1973)
New Jersey (2007)
New Mexico* (2009)
New York (2007)#
Rhode Island (1984)**
Vermont (1964)
West Virginia (1965)
Wisconsin (1853)

ALSO
- Dist. of Columbia (1981)
* In March 2009, New Mexico voted to abolish the death penalty. However, the repeal was not retroactive, leaving two people on the state's death row.

** In 1979, the Supreme Court of Rhode Island held that a statute making a death sentence mandatory for someone who killed a fellow prisoner was unconstitutional. The legislature removed the statute in 1984.

# In 2004, the New York Court of Appeals held that a portion of the state's death penalty law was unconstitutional. In 2007, they ruled that their prior holding applied to the last remaining person on the state's death row. The legislature has voted down attempts to restore the statute.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/states-and-without-death-penalty

[Pene784]

Does it bother you that the point that I made tends to ring true and is very hypocritical

Um, no. I have never met a person that is not hypocritical on some points. Have you? People feel very differently about innocent babies and murders and drug dealers. It is what it is.


Try not to be so threatened by us Atheists, its really not necessary.

What a moronic statement. I am not a bigot and do not feel threatened by other people because of their faith. You do not have to attack peoples faith constantly, and yes that it what you were doing. You are a bigot.


Please refrain from putting words in my mouth, my entire FAMILY is Catholic and I do not judge them nor do I feel superior to them

Maybe you are a hypocrite and think that all other catholics are stupid and nonsensical except for the ones that you are related to.

[Nell]

What was this thread about again? Jesus and the haters who hate him? I forget.

http://i37.tinypic.com/28ktx6q.jpg

[AngelFire]

I don't know... there are these child murderers who we should ship over there for their death row sentences.

Yes, but you forgot to pack some heroin with them. This will assure that all pedos get what they deserve.

[Echo]

Um, no. I have never met a person that is not hypocritical on some points. Have you? People feel very differently about innocent babies and murders and drug dealers. It is what it is.

It is not YOUR position or moral right to decide if they live or die. What if the person is innocent and they are murdered by a jury of their peers and the state? The person could be an innocent just like the unborn fetus. The system, juries, and police MAKE MISTAKES all of the time.


What a moronic statement. I am not a bigot and do not feel threatened by other people because of their faith. You do not have to attack peoples faith constantly, and yes that it what you were doing. You are a bigot.

Moronic? For whatever reasons, you sound pretty threatened to me.

Maybe you are a hypocrite and think that all other catholics are stupid and nonsensical except for the ones that you are related to.

Again, STOP putting words into my mouth. Just because I don't subscribe to your faith does not mean that I think "all" catholics are stupid and nonsensical. Let me reiterate the reiteration for the thousandth time: TO EACH HIS OWN.

Get over yourself.

[Pene784]

Originally Posted by Pene784 View Post
Um, no. I have never met a person that is not hypocritical on some points. Have you? People feel very differently about innocent babies and murders and drug dealers. It is what it is.

It is not YOUR position or moral right to decide if they live or die. What if the person is innocent and they are murdered by a jury of their peers and the state? The person could be an innocent just like the unborn fetus. The system, juries, and police MAKE MISTAKES all of the time.


What a moronic statement. I am not a bigot and do not feel threatened by other people because of their faith. You do not have to attack peoples faith constantly, and yes that it what you were doing. You are a bigot.

Moronic? For whatever reasons, you sound pretty threatened to me.

Maybe you are a hypocrite and think that all other catholics are stupid and nonsensical except for the ones that you are related to.
Again, STOP putting words into my mouth. Just because I don't subscribe to your faith does not mean that I think "all" catholics are stupid and nonsensical. Let me reiterate the reiteration for the thousandth time: TO EACH HIS OWN.

Get over yourself.

Um, what the hell are you talking about? I was stating MY OWN opinion. I never claimed you said anything, just gave my own opinion and thoughts on the matter. How the hell do I sound threatened? Because I know you are a bigot?
And FYI I haven't said how I feel about the death penalty, you just assumed that is how I feel. I was just speaking as to why some folks may feel strongly about the death penalty and still be pro choice. I agree that men and women can be mistakenly prosecuted and given the death penalty. I am on the fence on the matter. On the one hand I want to see baby rapers and murderers killed but on the other hand mistakes ARE made. I am happy that I have never had to serve on a jury where the death penalty is on the table. I don't know what I would do.

[biteme]

Seems it's down in general
No, DP states have not done better
but the murder rate has gone down since the DP came back after 1980
more murders from 1970 to 1980 when there was no DP
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-1996-2008

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-1996-2008

National Murder Rates, 1970 - 2008


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982
7.9 8.6 9 9.4 9.8 9.6 8.7 8.8 9 9.8 10.2 9.8 9.1
1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
8.3 7.9 8 8.6 8.3 8.4 8.7 9.4 9.8 9.3 9.5 9 8.2
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
7.4 6.8 6.3 5.7 5.5 5.6 5.6 5.7 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.6 5.4

[Echo]

Why must you bring religion into this? We get it you think people who are Christian or Catholic are stupid and nonsensical and you the mighty atheist is superior.

You are not putting words in my mouth here? I have NEVER said all Christians and Catholics are "stupid and non sensical." Nor have I implied that I am mighty or superior because I am Atheist.

You are totally defensive.

[Echo]

What a moronic statement. I am not a bigot and do not feel threatened by other people because of their faith. You do not have to attack peoples faith constantly, and yes that it what you were doing. You are a bigot.



Maybe you are a hypocrite and think that all other catholics are stupid and nonsensical except for the ones that you are related to.

And you did it YET again here....and even called me a bigot. Show me where I have said that all catholics and christians are stupid and nonsensical. Totally off base from my original point.

Again, stop putting words in my mouth, get a grip on your paranoid defensiveness, and get over yourself.

[Aslan]

LADIES

You're both pretty :)

I guess my kneejerk on this was death for drugs and the 24 hour notice after being imprisoned for 2 years. Perhaps in secret my heart bleeds and I just try to hide it.
At the same time malq and Nell are correct. Break the law in a different place and enjoy the law of that place.
I just hate China and their history of treating people in general.


December 30, 2009
China slapped a severe 11-year prison term on Liu Xiaobo, one of the country’s most well-known dissidents, showing itself to be as intransigent as ever when it comes to human rights. The verdict, which was handed down on Christmas Day by the Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People’s Court, stated that Liu, a former professor and pro-democracy activist, was guilty of rebelling against the Communist Party through his work on a petition called Charter 08, which called for reforms in both the political and legal systems. He had been detained for nearly a year after he posted the manifesto he drafted with hundreds of intellectuals on international Web sites demanding a multiparty system, the independence of the judiciary and freedom of the press, speech and religion.

The world expressed disappointment and concern about the sentence, which came after a closed trial. The United States called for Liu’s immediate release and the European Union castigated China for the lack of free speech and fair trials. One human rights watcher lamented that the outcome of the trial sent a strong message to the world that China is still not serious about its statements about human rights. The world had been hoping for a decision that was equivalent to the country’s rising economic and diplomatic ranking on the global stage.SNIP

If you get bored, give it a glance
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2914614

[malq]

Seems it's down in general
No, DP states have not done better
but the murder rate has gone down since the DP came back after 1980
more murders from 1970 to 1980 when there was no DP
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-1996-2008

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/murder-rates-1996-2008

National Murder Rates, 1970 - 2008


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982
7.9 8.6 9 9.4 9.8 9.6 8.7 8.8 9 9.8 10.2 9.8 9.1
1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995
8.3 7.9 8 8.6 8.3 8.4 8.7 9.4 9.8 9.3 9.5 9 8.2
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
7.4 6.8 6.3 5.7 5.5 5.6 5.6 5.7 5.5 5.6 5.7 5.6 5.4

Good stats Biteme. looks like Echo is too busy worrying about what i think and my religious views to have a look and respond to that.
violent crime has decreased by half since 1993. No thanks to the death penalty being wrapped around the axle by obfuscatory people debating it instead of doing it. Sorry too bloodthirsty for you Echo?

[malq]

LADIES

I just hate China and their history of treating people in general.



I agree, Aslan

There is little doubt China sucks. they have deplorable human rights records and they are mass polluters. However, on the stuff in their country. They have complete control. And rightfully so. Especially in their judicial system. It would be a turd in the punch bowl if China decided to tell us how to fix our scrambled egg judicial mess. Don't ya think? LOL

[Aslan]

Hmmm..unless of course it were war by sea

[Athena]

That is the craziest thing I have ever heard. No punishment deters?
Is that the basis of all DP arguments? Why punish anyone? feel free to explain that if you will.


and what does this mean?


That sounds like a broad sweep of nothing if I ever heard it. If I have to guess, you are saying whatever we agree to and whatever we can afford.
Its kinda like that management course principle, 'whatever works'. use that for every answer on the test.

Malq, I've explained both of these concepts a couple of times, now. You REFUSE to get it. You haven't even bothered to try to understand. I'm not going to rephrase the same goddamn concept 50 different ways in hope that one of them clicks with you. Please feel free to refer back to your eye for an eye thread, where my last post goes into detail... again.


In this threads case, my question is, who are we to throw our beliefs on the dp and crime and punishment in general on China?

We have the right to criticize, considering we're not in China. I also criticize their Communism, their media control, their one-child policy, etc., etc. Who am I to do that? A thinking human being. That "it's not my business" bullshit never really flew with me to begin with.

Now, on the government level, it's called "diplomacy". It's the same reason heads of state criticize and try to change their environmental policies or other human rights policies. We're all on this Earth together and, while we don't have the right to force China's hand, we absolutely have the right to try to sway them from practices that we consider detrimental.


On a side note - Pene, as you may be aware, "the Christian Right" is a standard political term that describes the Christian influence of the Republican Party ("right" or "conservative" as opposed to "left" or "liberal"). It's referred to as "the Christian Right" because there is a non-Christian Right. There's also a Christian Left (although much less demonstrative). So, Echo wasn't taking a shot at Christians in general - she was taking a shot at the blatant hypocrisy displayed by a single faction of Christians - the Christian Right - who, practically by definition, are pro-execution and anti-choice. They want to protect innocent life at all costs, even if it means the health or life of the mother in some cases, but are willing to risk innocent civilian executions through the continuation of capital punishment.

So, while I can understand why you may be a bit hyper-sensitive about Echo's opinions on the devout, in this particular case, you misconstrued her. :happy:

[eracsurfer]

Echo, shall I block quote you from the other threads where you said that someone shouldn't be allowed to teach due to the fact that YOU HAVE A FEELING that they were a creationist?

Or how about this little gem?

"In my opinion he is already smarter and more enlightened than most of the population. He is an Atheist. I would hardly call him a moron."

[Pene784]

So, while I can understand why you may be a bit hyper-sensitive about Echo's opinions on the devout, in this particular case, you misconstrued her.

Athena, while I value your opinion I would like to say I did not misconstrue anything nor am I hyper sensitive. She made a remark about Christians and I found it and her annoying, so I commented on it. She often makes disparaging remarks about religious people and it is offensive to me. I find her offensive and bigoted.

[malq]

Malq, I've explained both of these concepts a couple of times, now. You REFUSE to get it. You haven't even bothered to try to understand. I'm not going to rephrase the same goddamn concept 50 different ways in hope that one of them clicks with you. Please feel free to refer back to your eye for an eye thread, where my last post goes into detail... again.

Perfect, your way or the highway. LOL, feel free to throw yourself around a little more. I expected no less. Have it your way. I refuse to get what? Your blowhard opinion? I read it. I attempt to see good in it. Your assumption that I didn't even try to understand is condescending, presumptuous and expected when there is not a good rebuttal. Its arguments like yours that messed up the death penalty in the first place. That's what you will never get.




We have the right to criticize, considering we're not in China. I also criticize their Communism, their media control, their one-child policy, etc., etc. Who am I to do that? A thinking human being. That "it's not my business" bullshit never really flew with me to begin with.

Now, on the government level, it's called "diplomacy". It's the same reason heads of state criticize and try to change their environmental policies or other human rights policies. We're all on this Earth together and, while we don't have the right to force China's hand, we absolutely have the right to try to sway them from practices that we consider detrimental.

Sure critcize them all you want and thats your right, but its there domain and there's nothing you can do about it without biting the hand that feeds you. So pick and choose your battles.
You think their death penalty system needs review? fine, think it but leave them alone or you will come off as a hypocritical ne'er do well. we cant even make our own system function work well. At least they do something about it. Those who live in grass huts shouldn't have a bic lighter.



On a side note - Pene, as you may be aware, "the Christian Right" is a standard political term that describes the Christian influence of the Republican Party ("right" or "conservative" as opposed to "left" or "liberal"). It's referred to as "the Christian Right" because there is a non-Christian Right. There's also a Christian Left (although much less demonstrative). So, Echo wasn't taking a shot at Christians in general - she was taking a shot at the blatant hypocrisy displayed by a single faction of Christians - the Christian Right - who, practically by definition, are pro-execution and anti-choice. They want to protect innocent life at all costs, even if it means the health or life of the mother in some cases, but are willing to risk innocent civilian executions through the continuation of capital punishment.


So, while I can understand why you may be a bit hyper-sensitive about Echo's opinions on the devout, in this particular case, you misconstrued her. :happy:

Why bring up the christian right in an arena that is involved in another direction. That' s what I want to know. I saw it as bigoted and narrow minded myself. I mean really that was broad sweeping generalization.
I don't see Pene as hypersensitive. i was going to say it myself, but Echo thinks I beat on her so I am giving her a break at the moment. LOL

[Echo]

Echo, shall I block quote you from the other threads where you said that someone shouldn't be allowed to teach due to the fact that YOU HAVE A FEELING that they were a creationist?

Or how about this little gem?

"In my opinion he is already smarter and more enlightened than most of the population. He is an Atheist. I would hardly call him a moron."

Please feel free to do whatever it is that makes you happy but again, IF YOU READ THE ENTIRE THREAD, you might have a clue.

The little gem you are talking about was a very sarcastic comment to a very ignorant post, which if you kept on READING you would have realized. I can take peoples words out of context all day long and try to prove a point as well, but I prefer to just have a point.

Please refer to the same thread regarding The Creationist comment, as I have already responded to you twice regarding that particular post, you must not have read THAT either.

[Echo]

Athena, while I value your opinion I would like to say I did not misconstrue anything nor am I hyper sensitive. She made a remark about Christians and I found it and her annoying, so I commented on it. She often makes disparaging remarks about religious people and it is offensive to me. I find her offensive and bigoted.

You are entitled to your opinion of course, but for the record, I find you hyper sensitive and unable to hear or discuss anything that somehow "threatens" your religion.

Even if it makes sense. I would call that close minded.

[eracsurfer]

Please feel free to do whatever it is that makes you happy but again, IF YOU READ THE ENTIRE THREAD, you might have a clue.

The little gem you are talking about was a very sarcastic comment to a very ignorant post, which if you kept on READING you would have realized. I cant take peoples words out of context all day long and try to prove a point as well, but I prefer to just have a point.

Please refer to the same thread regarding The Creationist comment, as I have already responded to you twice regarding that particular post, you must not have read THAT either.

Apparently, you have a short memory. You tried to accuse me of not reading the other thread, to which I clearly responded that I was the one that had no need to change my position on the issue.

Please, explain to me how I have taken anything out of context. I asked you on more than one occasion to elaborate how your blanket statement about that subject was taken out of context, and you went away.

It seems you are very outspoken, until you are called to task. Then you get defensive.

Not trying to re-hash the other thread, but you back-peddled claiming you said "IF" that teacher was a creationist...yada yada yada.

Oh, and...
"And nowhere did I state that she "should lose her job." Although if she were teaching my child Creationism in a publicly taxed school I would have a serious problem with it, just as I imagine she would if I taught evolution at her church.
"

"I have a feeling that this woman is a creationist, in which case she does not belong teaching a damn thing in the school system.
"Good Morning Children and by the way Dinosaurs never roamed the earth. GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE!
""
I even re-read it... no "IF" in there. Out of context? I think not.

Another post from you... "I have repeated it over and over again and we STILL have no idea in what class, subject, or way the teacher was utilizing The Holy Bible."

Had you actually done some research yourself, you would have found out what the rest of us had known, that it was a Western Literature course, not an indoctrination to creationism. The links were there in the thread. I checked them out, did you?

Throughout many of your posts, it comes through loud and clear your absolute hatred of the Christian faith, and your prior comment "Let me reiterate the reiteration for the thousandth time: TO EACH HIS OWN".... I call bullshit. (See your own words above!) This apparently wouldn't apply if you are a creationist.

Not only are you a bigot, you are a bigot in denial.

[Echo]

Apparently, you have a short memory. You tried to accuse me of not reading the other thread, to which I clearly responded that I was the one that had no need to change my position on the issue.

Please, explain to me how I have taken anything out of context. I asked you on more than one occasion to elaborate how your blanket statement about that subject was taken out of context, and you went away.

It seems you are very outspoken, until you are called to task. Then you get defensive.

Not trying to re-hash the other thread, but you back-peddled claiming you said "IF" that teacher was a creationist...yada yada yada.

Oh, and...
"And nowhere did I state that she "should lose her job." Although if she were teaching my child Creationism in a publicly taxed school I would have a serious problem with it, just as I imagine she would if I taught evolution at her church.
"

"I have a feeling that this woman is a creationist, in which case she does not belong teaching a damn thing in the school system.
"Good Morning Children and by the way Dinosaurs never roamed the earth. GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE!
""
I even re-read it... no "IF" in there. Out of context? I think not.

Another post from you... "I have repeated it over and over again and we STILL have no idea in what class, subject, or way the teacher was utilizing The Holy Bible."

Had you actually done some research yourself, you would have found out what the rest of us had known, that it was a Western Literature course, not an indoctrination to creationism. The links were there in the thread. I checked them out, did you?

Throughout many of your posts, it comes through loud and clear your absolute hatred of the Christian faith, and your prior comment "Let me reiterate the reiteration for the thousandth time: TO EACH HIS OWN".... I call bullshit. (See your own words above!) This apparently wouldn't apply if you are a creationist.

Not only are you a bigot, you are a bigot in denial.

Jesus Christ! Get off of your soap box. LMFAO!

TO EACH HIS OWN is the way that I live my life, but that does not stop me from having an OPINION, and if that opinion wars with your opinion then so be it.

A person has every right to be a creationist, but in my OPINION if a creationist is teaching my child creationism in a PUBLIC school I would have a problem with it. Its really not that difficult to comprehend or understand.

I am outspoken and opinionated and have no problem with being "called to task" , please don't flatter yourself.

And I will repeat for the thousandth time for you and your friend Pene, that I do not hold "absolute hatred" for the Catholic/Christian faith. Not believing in it, disagreeing with it, and challenging it is not the same as 'absolute hatred."

That my dear hypocrite, is a very bigoted thing to say.

Love Thy Neighbor....remember?

[Pene784]

You are entitled to your opinion of course, but for the record, I find you hyper sensitive and unable to hear or discuss anything that somehow "threatens" your religion.

Even if it makes sense. I would call that close minded.

Do you just drag stuff out of thin air? I directly addressed your view about christians being hypocritical. I never said it didn't make sense, I said people feel very differently about babies and murderers, which can lead to a hypocritical stance. That doesn't mean I am hypersensitive. Why bring religion into it all? It wasn't being discussed in this thread and had absolutely nothing to do with it. You brought it up to annoy and aggravate. Well congratulations I was annoyed, your mission was accomplished. I never felt that my religion was threatened in any way, that is just you spouting trash. Not sure how any of this makes me close minded either, though I am sure you will do your very best to show me.

[Echo]

Do you just drag stuff out of thin air? I directly addressed your view about christians being hypocritical. I never said it didn't make sense, I said people feel very differently about babies and murderers, which can lead to a hypocritical stance. That doesn't mean I am hypersensitive. Why bring religion into it all? It wasn't being discussed in this thread and had absolutely nothing to do with it. You brought it up to annoy and aggravate. Well congratulations I was annoyed, your mission was accomplished. I never felt that my religion was threatened in any way, that is just you spouting trash. Not sure how any of this makes me close minded either, though I am sure you will do your very best to show me.

Thin air? Alrighty then.......

Really Pene, contrary to what you believe I did not make a very relevant point regarding The Death Penalty and a certain faction of its supporters to somehow annoy you. The fact is that their stance on the issue wars with their moral superiority regarding abortion and it really does boggle my mind. In my opinion, It is hypocritical to the nth degree.

And as far your repeated question of why I brought religion up at all......have you noticed the category that this thread resides in?

There goes your defensiveness yet again. If my observation annoyed and aggravated you so badly, I suggest that you dig deeper and ask yourself why.

You are so clearly in an uproar and state that I think that I am a "Mighty Atheist", and "feel superior to Christians" ,you have called me a bigot over and over again, I have to question why you feel so threatened?

Why you are so incredibly sensitive and defensive? Is it because you saw some truth in my statement?

[Pene784]

Why you are so incredibly sensitive and defensive? Is it because you saw some truth in my statement?

Once again Echo. Let me lead you through this like a slow 2 year old. I NEVER SAID THAT YOUR STATEMENT DID NOT MAKE SENSE. I said people feel very differently about babies and murderers, which can lead to a hypocritical stance. Do not flatter yourself into believing that you can make me or anyone else feel threatened. Annoyed, yes, threatened, not a chance in the hell you apparently don't believe in. And you are right. I need to ask myself why I let someone like you, someone I know to be a bigot and crap starter irritate me. People like you should simply be ignored.

[eracsurfer]

I cannot believe how arrogant you are, even when you are proven wrong!

"That my dear hypocrite, is a very bigoted thing to say."

How in the hell am I a hypocrite or a bigot? Show me.

Hypocrite: see Echo, example to follow...

"You are so clearly in an uproar and state that I think that I am a "Mighty Atheist", and "feel superior to Christians"... (claiming denial to your feelings)

"smarter and more enlightened than most of the population. He is an Atheist." (proof of your feelings, or are you such a hypocrite that you say this just to draw out the ire in people of faith?)

Ok, so you don't claim to feel superior, just smarter and more enlightened?

As far as love thy neighbor... why do you imply that I am a Christian? Just because only an unenlighted Christian would dare call you out on your bigotry?

Even after being proven you were wrong in your statement, you STILL claim to be right.

Even though I am not of the "Christian Right", I can absolutely see the argument against abortion but for the DP. I don't necessarily agree with it, but since you love to throw out the biblical references... How's this one: "Eye for an eye".

Fetus: Chance it has not committed murder or rape 100%

Person on Death Row: Chance he/she has not committed murder or rape - take whatever statistical view you wish, it's not going to be 100%

Again, I may not agree with their view on everything, but I can UNDERSTAND it.
But, apparently understanding is something you are completely unable to do.

As far as getting off of my soapbox, I haven't even started. You have issues with religion...I have an issue with ignorance in all forms, and will call a spade a spade every chance I get.

[Echo]

Once again Echo. Let me lead you through this like a slow 2 year old. I NEVER SAID THAT YOUR STATEMENT DID NOT MAKE SENSE. I said people feel very differently about babies and murderers, which can lead to a hypocritical stance. Do not flatter yourself into believing that you can make me or anyone else feel threatened. Annoyed, yes, threatened, not a chance in the hell you apparently don't believe in. And you are right. I need to ask myself why I let someone like you, someone I know to be a bigot and crap starter irritate me. People like you should simply be ignored.

You are incredibly bitter and the one that is acting like an irate TWO YEAR OLD.

Do you realize how childish you are being? Ordinarily, I would take offense at being repeatedly called a bigot with no basis whatsoever, but the fact that the utterly ridiculous barb is coming from you makes it easy to ignore.

Calling me a bigot because I do not agree or aspire to your religious beliefs is IGNORANT, and furthermore, repeatedly stating that I "hate christians and feel superior to them" is further evidence of your downright lack of ability to have an intelligent discussion without putting words in my mouth.

I do not hate nor do I feel superior to Christians and Catholics. I do not "spout trash."

If you cannot handle the three things thread then I suggest you stay out of it, it is hilarious to me that you have questioned over and over again why religion is brought up in a thread that resides in the "politics and religion category"

Get a grip.

[Echo]

Throughout many of your posts, it comes through loud and clear your absolute hatred of the Christian faith, and your prior comment "Let me reiterate the reiteration for the thousandth time: TO EACH HIS OWN".... I call bullshit. (See your own words above!) This apparently wouldn't apply if you are a creationist
Not only are you a bigot, you are a bigot in denial.


Making the assumption for the umpteenth TIME that I carry hatred in my heart for Christians is arrogant, bigoted, presumptuous, and ignorant. And since you have called me one or more of these things more than once, your own words make you quite the hypocrite.

Carry on.

[Echo]

"smarter and more enlightened than most of the population. He is an Atheist." (proof of your feelings, or are you such a hypocrite that you say this just to draw out the ire in people of faith?)

Again, let me spell it out slowly for you since you seem to have serious comprehension problems.

Did.you.bother.to.read.the.entire.thread? Did you?

I think not. If you scroll down you would plainly SEE and READ the post where I state that this "gem" as you call it was an extremely sarcastic response to what I believed was an ignorant post.

At this point, its like talking to Rain man. It's actually quite amusing.

[Athena]

Okay... STOP.

Echo's opinion of Christians is not on trial here. If y'all care to put it on trial and she feels up to defending herself, I would encourage you to make a thread. That could be one hell of a thread, too.

But for now, this thread is about... (What is it about again?)... This thread is about a Brit being executed in China. Many topics relate: International diplomacy, capital punishment, drug laws, etc., etc. But this has spiraled crazy off-topic, and I would appreciate y'all's help in ushering it back on topic, if you would be so kind. If you would not be so kind, well... I've got options.

[Pene784]

Athena, that was exactly my point, that religion had no business in this thread. This thread was about the Death Penalty and Chinese Politics. Period. That is why I was annoyed when Echo found it necessary to once again make an inflammatory remark about religion in a thread that had nothing to do with religion. I was told by Echo that this was " 3 things" and exactly what it was for.

Back on topic. If you commit a crime while in another country you can expect to be punished by "the law of the land". If you do not like the laws of a certain land, well either do not travel there or do not commit crimes while you are traveling there. Was the death penalty appropriate in this case? According to the laws in China, YES. Until efforts to change the law are successful, this is the punishment that they will hand out to drug smugglers. Period.
I can righteously sit here and say that the death penalty is wrong and never appropriate. On the other hand I have never had a child or other family brutally murdered by some evil person. If I had I might feel like it was completely appropriate.

[Athena]

Athena, that was exactly my point, that religion had no business in this thread. This thread was about the Death Penalty and Chinese Politics. Period. That is why I was annoyed when Echo found it necessary to once again make an inflammatory remark about religion in a thread that had nothing to do with religion. I was told by Echo that this was " 3 things" and exactly what it was for.

Totally understandable. In the future, however, we here at the Dreamin' Demon offer a lovely array of rolley-eyed emoticons to choose from. Perhaps that would be a better response rather than dragging the thread even further off-topic by questioning her about it.


Back on topic. If you commit a crime while in another country you can expect to be punished by "the law of the land". If you do not like the laws of a certain land, well either do not travel there or do not commit crimes while you are traveling there. Was the death penalty appropriate in this case? According to the laws in China, YES. Until efforts to change the law are successful, this is the punishment that they will hand out to drug smugglers. Period.
I can righteously sit here and say that the death penalty is wrong and never appropriate. On the other hand I have never had a child or other family brutally murdered by some evil person. If I had I might feel like it was completely appropriate.

That's just it, though. "Feelings" shouldn't play into policy for that very reason. They change depending on your particular circumstance. The death penalty stance is not necessarily righteous, either. Sure, some are righteous about it, but, for example, my opposition to the death penalty is based on objective analysis, not moral preference.