Tuesday, September 22, 2009

subjective morality and moral dilemma

Subjective morality

Each and every individual has their own moral concept of what is good and what is bad and that can be from empathizing with others, experiences, learnings, and such. However, some people can think one thing is moral while another disagrees.

For instance; let’s just say that a man comes into the boy’s house, kills all his family except him, and he goes out to seek revenge. One may say, “He is right to do it because what the killer did was wrong.” Another may say, “He should not do it.”

Both of these are neither right nor wrong. The reason is this; morality is not absolute and no one can be absolutely right on what is moral or not.

Let’s look at another scenario; if a man in the attic along with many other people is hiding from bad people, the baby is crying his head off. This man kills the baby to silence it. One may say, “He only did it to keep them from knowing where they are.”

Another may say, “This is wrong.” Again, neither is right nor wrong because in this situation, it is never an easy answer to make, no matter how hard you pretend it isn’t hard. This is a moral dilemma.

The whole point is, everyone has their own idea of what is moral or isn’t. But sometimes, some believes that morality comes from a deity. But even so, we no longer own slaves, even though the bible clearly states that we can keep slaves.

Another is that we must murder another that breaks the laws that their God has set down to humanity. This shows that people no longer holds the religious teachings as literal but metaphorically. This is because they disagree with the deity.

This is why people make their own moral judgment based on what they think is right or wrong. Even the bad dictators do not think they are bad because they thought they were doing what they thought was right. Don’t get me wrong.

I have no intention of defending them, I’m just giving them the benefit of the doubt. I do not think that Hitler was sitting down cackling like a madman saying, “It’s fun.”

Like with the scenarios I presented, one thinks another was right to do something, another is thinks they were wrong to do it.

sorry for not updating

sorry for not updating, but i have been doing videos on youtube and if you like, you can check it out and the username is TimTheLoner. I've had made over a hundred videos.

Thursday, August 20, 2009

We will not fall [MIRROR]

we will never be silenced.


Orginal video here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xk8wtc...
Made by:
http://www.youtube.com/user/RtFusion
Subscribe to these users:
http://www.youtube.com/user/TheGuardi...
http://www.youtube.com/user/VforVogte...
http://www.youtube.com/user/EdibleNap...
http://www.youtube.com/user/TheShwaNerd

Links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_re...
http://investor.google.com/fin_data.html

Sunday, July 26, 2009

Wearing socks with sandals

"Oh i don't like them beacuse .... because.... because... " Well they got nothing.

Why do i wear socks with sandals? Well, in a hot summer time, it makes you sweat even at your feet. So why do we wear them? Because it's comfortable, because the socks keeps the sandals from flying off when sweaty or feeling slippery inside the soles, and the best thing is, it's fine!

So anyone wiuth that kind of problem... i pity them.

Japanese wears socks with sandals, and i do it too, even though i'm not Japanese. Oh sure, they don't wear them much now, but back then, it was fashinable.

I really don't get why people have a problem with socks with sandals. I think it's just not really a big deal.

Thursday, July 9, 2009

Oh, it's not a contradiction!

When theists speaks of the verses of their religious scriptures, they claim there is no error or contradictions. If they read the bible cover to cover, i find it hard to believe that they can actually say that there is no error or contradiction.

This book is either written by a God or written by man, it can't be both. It's a complete contradiction there; A God who is an all powerful, all loving, all knowing being and yet wants a human to write a book for him and never does he teaches him how to make copies or how to read or write.

What is there to believe anywhere when it comes to religion? It's thousands of years ago, and yet we see the lunacy in religious paranoWhen theists speak of the verses of their religious scriptures, they claim there is no error or contradictions. If they read the bible cover to cover, i find it hard to believe that they can actually say that there is no error or contradiction.

This book is either written by a God or written by man, it can't be both. It's a complete contradiction there; A God who is an all powerful, all loving, all knowing being and yet wants a human to write a book for him and never does he teaches him how to make copies or how to read or write.

What is there to believe anywhere when it comes to religion? It's thousands of years ago, and yet we see the lunacy in religious paranoia like the idea that there is a devil everywhere, there is sin in everything, and the idea that God only appears to the believer. Horse manure!

As for the contradictions, theists claims there are no contradictions and that these words meant something else. Well I am sorry to burst your deluded little bubble, but why shouldn’t it mean what it says? Aren’t you just denying your God’s word and claiming it meant something else? This is no different than saying, “Let’s make stuff up.” They’ll always make things up to suit them and claim that their “interpretations” makes it all clear.

The Bible itself is caked with errors, contradictions, insane laws, demands of sacrifices, and of course the “Sin” and gruesome stories and the Christians happily goes, “It’s the inspired word of God!” like as if the book was Harry Potter instead. The Bible is no more true than the Lord of the rings.

We take a part of the bible, examined it, and find it to be beyond ridiculous, and not only that but completely different from the other versions. If there was a God, why would he want us to have several different versions of the bible and different Sects? It makes no sense and all of them argues among each other claiming that they are the “true religion” which is no different than Death Eaters claiming they are true supporter of Voldemort. Crazy lug nuts claims that they are true basically because their sect tells them this. Well why wouldn’t they? No theist would say, “You know, maybe the Muslims might have it right,” “Maybe it’s the Hindus.” Or “Maybe atheists are right that there is no God of any kind.” None of them would say that. Why not? Because they want power, they want to use religion for their own benefits.

Where does this come into the contradictions you ask? You just saw it. Different sects, Different bibles, verses that makes no sense and totally conflicts the other made verses and different religion. Nothing makes sense and none of them could truly be the “True religion” because there are none.

If there was an all powerful, all loving, all knowing God, there will be no actual religion, no different beliefs on God, no wars, and it would be found scientifically just as well. Plus from the secular point of view, none of the Bible would be actually moral and is lacking evidence for historical events and no scientific evidence either. To say the Bible is true contradicts everything, To say your religion is true contradicts others, so really, it’s all hooey and not worth my time worrying about.

If there is a God, I would tell him to shove the Bible up his ass.

Sunday, April 26, 2009

Why Jesus’ sacrifice makes no sense.

Why Jesus’ sacrifice makes no sense.

Let me start off by saying that Jesus knew he was going to be betrayed by Judas, be denied three times by Peter, be nailed to a cross, and rise three days later and ascend into Heaven.

But. The question I ask is, why?

I know he wanted to, “save mankind from his father’s wrath by dying for your sin.” But again, why?

This God doesn’t strike to me as an all loving, all merciful, and all powerful because he has doomed mankind with sin because some girl ate a fruit. That alone from the beginning was reason enough for me to stray from a God, if he did exist.

“I think I’ll go create a man and a woman. Then put a tree with fruit in the Garden. Then tell them not to eat it.” Of course, some Christians tells me this was a test. He knows they will eat the fruit.
“And then while they eat it, I will get really angry and doom mankind. Yep. That’ll be a perfect way for things to go.”

But he didn’t know Adam and Eve ate the fruit, or Satan tempted them. Christians tells me he does know because he is all knowing. Sounds like he wanted mankind to sin so he can get pissed off.

“Son. Eat the chocolate bar so I can punish you.”

This is contradiction in on itself. This is Completely screwed up.

Now back to the point, Jesus, is a son of God, or God himself, or just man. I don’t know which ones the Christians believes about Jesus.

Jesus didn’t remain dead, he rises back to life. So where was the sacrifice? He no longer died, he just simply allows people to kill him and rises three days later.

Also, I might add that Jesus wasn’t arrested and killed because the Jews wanted him dead, Jesus wanted them to do it. Jews, if this were true, are blameless. And yet people call the Jews Christ killers. Jesus committed suicide. He committed suicide because he wanted to die. He knew he was going to die AND is willing to allow this.

Think for the minute why he allows the Romans to crucify him. The Jews calls him a blasphemer, because Jesus says he was the son of God. People said he can heal the sick, raise the dead. But when asked, Jesus refuses. Why? Why die for people who didn’t ask for it?

Why not simply forgive, and all be fine?

And since he “died for our sins,” people today are still sinning and people are prosecuting them or getting all, “That’s a bad thing, sin, oh evil thing, nasty, kill the …” you know what I mean? So even when jesus dies for our sin, people acts as though this story didn’t Happen. Hmmm.

If Jesus dies for your sin, then why are we making a big deal about people “sinning?” It’s over with, done, the end. But people still persistently acts the same way after his death. So much for, “Dying for our sins.” It must mean nothing then.

not quite done yet.

Sunday, April 19, 2009

Secular law and Order Vs God’s law and order

In secular world, anything you do that breaks a law, you get punished for it. Forgiveness does not factor into it because you will be punished regardless as you should be. Simply pleading forgiveness and expecting to walk away free and not punished would simply mean people can break the laws and constantly plead forgiveness. That’s anarchy because that would mean no law, no government, no police, no court, no prison.

Now as for God’s law and order, anything that God doesn’t like, you must ask forgiveness and he’ll let you go free to sin some more. Which it means, you’re free to rape, murder, steal, molest, do other atrocity as you like. All you need to do was ask an imaginary sky daddy for forgiveness.

Guess where I rather be in. Yep, that’s right, the secular law and order.

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Insane biblical laws

1) Do not cook a baby goat in its mother's milk.
2) If two men fights and a man's wife reaches for the opponent's balls, the husband should cut off her hands.
3) Do not put an ox and an ass together in the same wagon.
4) Man should not sleep with mankind as with womankind, for it's an abomination.
5) If your child talks back, you should beat with with the rod.
6) sent a rebellious teenager out to the city to stone him to death.
7) If a bride is not found to be a virgin on her wedding day, take her to her father's doorstep and kill her.
8) If your father, your brother, your wife, anybody you know says, "Let us go serve other Gods," You should kill them mercilessly. In fact, destroy the city along with the livestock.
9) A slave whom you shall have, you can buy them from bordering lands around you.
10) It is ok to sell your daughter into slavery.
11) Kill those who works on a sabbath
12) Those who are blind, disabled cannot approach the alter.
13) A man should not approach a woman who is on her period.
14) If a man had sex with a woman who has her period should be sent away from the people.
15) If an ox gores a slave, kill the ox.
16) If a man has sex with an animal, kill them both.
17) It's ok to beat your slave, but cannot kill.
18) Sacrifice unblemished animals to God.
19) Do not worship graven images
20) Don't eat pigs
21) If a woman does not cry rape, it's her fault.
22) Rapist must marry his rape victim.
23) a man who has long hair must be sent to death.
24) Man, slave should all be circumcised.

There are countless of laws, and i believe all speaks for themselves. It's repulsive, it's insane, and most certainly, it has nothing to do with morality or logical reason.

Why the Christian God is a monster

Many Christians will have you know that God is not a monster, that he is all loving, all merciful, all forgiving father god. The problem lies in the Bible and outside the Bible. Christians simply covers ears and claim God is "Not responsible for that." "That was Satan's doing," "God works in mysterious ways." and "God is punishing the wicked."

All of these have series of problems that do not match up.

God, in the Bible, has:

1) Flooded the world. Killing innocents, including babies.
2) Asks Abraham to murder his son, just to see if he'll do it for him.
3) Sends his own son, who is strangely himself, to be tortured and killed.
3) Has killed over tens of millions of innocent people.
4) He kills the firstborns of Egypt.
5) He sends down plagues, famine, war, poverty, disease, and death.
5) Sets down laws which all are ridiculous and vile. (I'll post it next)
6) Makes wagers with Satan to see if Job will remain loyal after destroying his life.
7) The Bible clearly shows God as a tyrant, liar, heartless, hypocritical, pro slavery, pro abortion, misogynist, homophobic, racist, commits infanticide, murderer, his reasoning is circular, his moral ethics is warped, clearly not all knowing, not all powerful, and most certainly not all loving, he contradicts himself, and is a coward for not showing himself to us today either.

Friday, April 10, 2009

why i would do not want religion.

This magical sky daddy, the one Christians calls their God, is not worthy of my praise or worship. And i will tell you why.

Your God wants us to own slaves. We don't do that and we should never do that. But we did and that was disgusting. Treating humans like farm equipments? That is precisely why your God is not worthy of my worship. But that does not end there.

He demands that i can treat a woman like a sexual object, that women should also be silenced, women should not have authority or even teach at all. This god is a misogynist jerk.

He demands that i beat a child with a rod. I stone gays, atheists, witches, disobedient children, people working on a sabbath, people luring you to other faiths, and so on. I will not kill anybody just because God doesn't like them. In fact, they do not deserved to be harmed why? Because they are who they are and killing them will not stop it. It's repulsive.

Your God allows natural disasters, sex offenders, viruses, mass murderers, and the likes to take lives without lifting a finger. If he's powerful, but doesn't want to stop it, he's evil. If he isn't powerful and wants to, he is not worthy of worship. If he is powerful and wants to do it, then why didn't he? What is he waiting for? What is the point of waiting?

Now why i don't want religion.

You indoctrinate your children. That means you raped their mind. You took away their right to think for themselves.

Your religion is fraught with heinous violent acts like the crusades, holy war, inquisitions, witch hunts, Holocaust, bombing of the abortion clinics, taking evolution out of schools, and attacking gays and atheists.

Because of religion, there had been slavery, discrimination, violence, lies, fear mongering, deceit, greed, power hungry, and of course indoctrination in children.

Religion has no meaning in my life.

I'm an atheist, and always will be. I'm happy, I'm law abiding, I'm skeptical towards everything, I'm always thinking for myself, and i never want to hurt or violate human rights. That is enough for me. No room for bullshit.

Indoctrination is child abuse

There is nothing more wrong than forcing your child to believe whatever you wanted them to believe. You took away their decision to make a choice, you raped their mind with hatred and prejudice, you place fear of hell in their brain, you made them feel that anything like homosexuality or non belief is wrong and are doomed to hell.

It's disgusting and should not be allowed. You spread hate, you spread fear, you spread lies. They need to be able to think for themselves, not to absorb all your belief. What problems is there in indoctrination in children?

They will be hating without logical reason all because you forced the hate in them. It confuses them.

They will always will be afraid because of your threats of damnation if they did "Sins"

There is no logical reason to indoctrination. It's child abuse. It's violation against human rights, it's violation to free speech, it's violation to church and state seperation. How? You force kids to believe your beliefs against their will.

Tuesday, April 7, 2009

If God exists, If he dictates the Bible PT .1

If God exists, which God is that? Christians says their God exists, but all are false. Muslims says, "Allah!", Hindus believe's it's Krishna, Biddhists believes it's Buddha, It could even be Zeus, Ra, Jupiter, or any other Gods.

Let's just say that the Christian God is the only god that exists. What kind of God is he? Christians claims he's all loving, all knowing, all powerful god. If that be the case, then that God sounds wonderful. But is that God from the Bible? Let's take a look at the Bible.

The Sexism in the Bible is all over the Bible. In it, women were not allowed to speak, or have authurity over men, or even teach. That means that Man can do whatever he wants with the woman, a woman can not be a teacher, and women can't be allowed to speak. However, in the Christian homes, Churches, schools, politics, authors, and so on all have many women speaking, having authroity, and teaching. Why is this? Because women fought against the sexism by men. They also are going against the Bible. But in a strange turn of event, many women believes in God, starts teaching about the Bible, and so on. It makes no sense to me because the Bible treats them like objects, Women fights against that, but embraces it.

The family values from the bible is warped and vile. In the old testament, we're supposed to beat our children with the rod, kill disobedient teenagers, silence our women for they're inferior. It even says if your brother, your father, your wife, or anyone tells you, "Let us go serve other gods." you are to kill them mercilessly. Also, in the new testament, Jesus stated that anyone who does not hate mother, father, brother sister, wife and children, and even himself cannot be my disciple. While also, the Bible clearly states we should honor thy mother and father as well as thou shalt not kill. This bible clearly makes the morality vague, warped, and dangerously twisted which resulted in many deaths of family members for religious reasons. Even children were beat for masturbating, for being gay, or disbelieving in a god, or anything that the bible says is wrong.

Monday, April 6, 2009

Trailer: Revolution for freethought the movie

(Message: the year 2020 The hate of Atheism grows)

(Music begins and slowly rises)

President: I do not believe that Atheists are recognized as US Citizens nor can they be considered patriots

man: There is a God and they are sinners against God.

Woman: Each and Every one of the Atheists are a threat. They want to destroy our morality, they want to destroy us!

Sam Harris: the fact that nearly half of the American population believes this, purely on the basis of religious dogma, should be considered a moral and intellectual emergency.

Amazing Atheist: There is no God!

(Message: America declares war against Atheists)

(Explosion in the desert)

Tim: They are against me! They are against you! Why? Because we don't believe in God!

(Gunfight in the jungle)

Priest: They are blasphemers! Kill them all! For God! For God! For God!

(A soldier gunned down in the Desert)

President: This scourge must stop!

Tim: Now!

(the sky is covered with jet fighters and explosions over the city)

Tim: They destroyed freedom. They destroyed everything. For what? for power and control.

(Suspense music heightens and the explosions, soldiers yelling, and the terrified faces of the injured people)

Fred Phelps: They will all burn in hell!

Penn Juliette: This is bullshit!

(Soldiers exploded)

young soldier: I'm scared sir.
Tim: Me too.

(Soldiers are yelling, many citizens are praying, crying or screaming and gunfire intensifies)

President: You are all terrorists!
Tim: prove it!

(More explosions)

Priest: God is real my son. And he will protect me from you.
Tim: (Kills him) Guess not.

(More soldiers yelling, more gunfire)

President: It is over.
Tim: (Bloody) no. It's just beginning. (Kicks him)

Osama: Kill all infidels!
(Muslims marches)

Priest: God loves us all, but these blasphemers walks the path with satan.

Tim: Men! We shall not fear them! We fight for honor! For democracy! For liberty! For the freedom for all! Let us take arms! They want control! They want to gain power! They have it now and now look what has happened!

(Battle intensifies)

Tim: Carve the words into your hearts! You are the man of liberty! You are the man of truth! Religion has corrupted lives of the innocents, they have killed before in the name of God. Now! Now is the time to stand! Now is the time to shape our stories! Live free to think for ourselves or live with the corruption and mind control! for free thought! For truth! Too long have religion turned people against each other! Too long has religion seperated mankind!

(The title shows up, the music dies down)

Tim: This is the revolution for freethought. Our founding fathers taught us the true meaning freedom. But these Christians? They forgotten the meaning of freedom. This is the Holy War. They all thought they were for good, but they forget one thing.

the bearded soldier: Sir?

Tim: (Turns to him) They kill out of hate. Out of fear. Does that make them good?

(The music intensifies. Tim fights a final fight with the samurai sword. The slashes across the screen, then goes black, the music dies)

Sunday, April 5, 2009

take your pick

this is the choice you have to make. This is for the death penalty argument.

Which one would you choose?

25 guilty murderers, pedophiles, and rapists in death row, while the rest of the potential victims lives, while risking at least one innocent man?

---OR---

25 guilty murderers, pedophiles, and rapists alive to kill inmates and guards, escape, appeal, get wrongly released, and many innocents dies?

Saturday, April 4, 2009

how i became an atheist

I do not think i can put this all in a order, but I'll do what i can.

I believe the first thing that got me to start questioning Christianity is that Christians tend to speak for God. I have no idea why they want to speak for their God. Couldn't God just speak to all of us? I mean really speak to all of us like we can speak to each other in person. To say God wishes me to tell you this or that you believe God wants us to know this or that. It really makes no sense.

Another that gets to me is the unexplainable hatred for homosexuals. I even asked why gays are hated. All i got was, "It's an abomination" "The bible said so" "God gave gays AIDS" and so on. It makes no sense. I even researched about them and even talked to them. I find nothing wrong with them. How can a God hate someone for loving another whom is of the same sex? It makes no sense.

Another one is the Bible. It is filled with contradictions, it's filled with errors, it's filled with insane stories that warps moral perspective from us today. Nothing about the Bible explains anything and Christians claims it's all metaphors. I can't picture a God going, "Here's my book, read it and believe it. But you can view it in metaphors because i don't want to be frank." but the idea of viewing the Bible as metaphors only confuses it even more. If you take a cookbook and read the recipe, you don't change it to your liking and you don't take out something just because you don't like them.

And another one is manipulation from the Christians. I'm talking abstinence only, and it tells to not have sex, not even use birth control or to even masturbate. nothing about abstinence only made any sense.

and the threats that Christians gives us, "Believe in God or burn in hell!"

no verifiable evidence that any Deity exists.

Spreading fear like the end of the world. it's been assumed the world would end thousands of times through all these years. now some moron has decided to say the year 2012 is the end.

All religion has been copied from each other. How can any be true?

Accusations against atheists, Jews, gays, and so on with no proofs. They basically just make stuff up and they also attack them.

and lastly; war. Inquisition, holy war, holocaust, crusades, attack on gays, abortion, schools for teaching evolution, and so on.

The critics

We hear about those critics who presents their reviews on pretty much everything. I know for a fact that everybody is a critic, not just some who are certified critic.

Everyone has their own views about everything, and to listen to someone else's review and believe them is a little stupid.

A critic is not some agent of human mind, or some absolute being who's always right. A critic who presents his review is just making his or her own opinion. Let's say for the movie, no critic who reviews the same movie would be the same. Including everyone who gave their own review on the Internet or magazines.

In a movie, people have different ideas about how it's supposed to be made. Some are more interested in the pictures like the visual effects more than the storyline for an example, and vice versa

For one example of this movie called Lord of the rings: Fellowship of the ring, i believe in my own opinion it is a good movie, great visual effect, and good storyline. However, another people who reviews might be more likely to say, "It doesn't follow the book entirely." others might not agree with the storyline or the visual effect it presented. the Critics is everybody. We all present our views, but it's fine to disagree and i do not think anybody should expect anyone to follow their point of view.

Now let's move on to a Hotel, inn, motels, or the likes. Each and everyone may agree it should be clean and at least friendly. But not many agrees with what should run in the hotels. Some might like the idea of pets in hotels or no pets, some might like a certain accent in a hotel. It's a matter of personal interest and lots of people are given choices of hotels they wish to stay. A critic who reviews the hotel will basically give a review based on their experience, their taste in things, and so on. However, it would not be the same experience as everyone else feel, and people like certain tastes in things like the decor, the food, and staff.

As for the restaurants, it's not the matter of fancy food, it's the matter of how it tastes. Every critic who makes their review are only human. And their tastes are not the same as everyone elses. And you don't need to have food that is the best, it's really the best if you like it personally.

there are other things people presents their reviews as well, but still, they're not absolute or better than anyone else.

It is good to have reviews of course, very interesting to hear what people may say, however, your own review may be different from another's review. It's all about personal interests, experience, taste, and belief. And everyone is different. People's review does not matter, it's your own review that matters to you.

Friday, April 3, 2009

list of resons for supporting the death penalty

The world is not all black and white, and the whole vegeance thing? that's bullshit. We're not doing this in hope that it gives comfort, we're doing that so nobody else have to suffer from what they went through.

Also, the reason people commit crimes is not because there is a death penalty, in fact the criminals are committing crimes because they wanted to. The death penalty does reduce the murder rates because a murderer is dead.

There is no perfect system, there is no perfect solution, but the death penalty is better than life in prison. The reason is, is because heinous criminals often do not regret their crime, they are not afraid of prison, and they most certainly confident they'll get out. With death row, they're dead period.

To say there are innocents on death row is true but very little evidence shows innocents on death row. The opponents exaggerates and claims that many more innocents are on death row, but this is bull and they know that. They are simply pulling numbers out of their ass just to fight against the death penalty. They also claim that even DNA evidence isn't 100% effective. Nothing is one hundred percent effective, however, with DNA evidence, Evidences, witnesses, Vouches, and such, increases a greater chance of correctly determine their guilt or innocence.

1) To say executing a murderer is hypocrisy, then police speeding after speeders, incarcerating kidnappers must be hypocrisy. Opponents need to get their logic straight.

2) There are no evidence that released or paroled killers or pedophiles didn’t commit crimes ever again. After being released or paroled, they’ve killed again.

3) There are little or no evidence that innocent people are on death row. To abolish the death penalty because of that risk is to abolish everything in the world. There are always and will be risks in everything we do.

4) There are claims that lethal injections are excruciatingly painful. It is important to know there are involuntary muscle movement and no evidence they really suffered.

5) We’re not sending death row inmates on a pleasure cruise, if they suffered, good.

6) Just because there are botched executions, doesn’t mean we should start pitying the inmate. Execution devices will sometimes be a little faulty.

7) To say there is no deterrence is to remove prisons and courthouses and police stations.

8) A dead murderer or a dead pedophile can’t commit anymore crimes. Deterrence is possible.

9) Imprisonment isn’t perfect because inmates can escape, appeal, be released, kill prison guards and inmates.

10) There are some people who said victims or the families who lost their loved ones don’t want us to kill for them. This kind of protest is insulting because this shows they don’t care about what happens to any other potential victims. If they did, they should not speak too highly of themselves.

11) As for the juvenile death penalty is to be permitted because teenagers are very well capable of murder, rape, and other crimes including molesting young children. To dismiss because of their age is in fact discrimination. Punishment is should fit to the crime not based on age, but of that specific crime.

12) The argument about The discrimination of the death penalty is very weak. It’s all about the crime one individual committed, not the color of their skin, intellect, disability, gender, age, or religion.


13) There is no reason at all to keep pedophiles or murderers alive. They have no feelings for the victims, and the prison does not deter them from that crime. You can capture a wolf, but you can’t make it harmless.

14) The opponents of the death penalty do not understand the meaning of the word punishment. They think it means the inmates should be treated as if in a hotel.

15) The criminal who has mental conditions or is mentally retarded, should not be waivered from severe punishment as those who have a clear state of mind. If both committed a similar heinous crime, they should receive the death penalty. To excuse because they didn’t know what they were doing is inexcusable because they committed the heinous crime.

16) The opponents of the death penalty say that the lethal injections are used by the Nazi. If this is to be the cause, then we should stop breathing because the Nazis themselves breathe.


17) Some of the anti-death penalty person said that he believes that the government is going around obliterating people exterminating people. That there was a psychological terror and a massive human extermination. This sounds a bit more like the Adolf Hitler’s regime in Germany. But the fact is, this is just mass paranoia without tangible piece of evidence.

18) The opponents claims that we are sinking to their level. This is highly false because the murderers and pedophiles violates human rights and killed innocent people. We gave trial, presented proof, and placed them on death row and then proceeded to execution.

19) To say we are murderers because the state executes a murderer is nonsense. If execution makes us a murderer, then going to war, self defense, police shooting the criminals to protect others, and even murderers murdering innocent people makes us all murderers. The opponent’s argument is illogical.

20) They say it is a violation in human rights because it is wrong to take someone’s life. Then if this is to be the case, then it is a violation in human rights to incarcerate criminals which denies them their liberty.

21) The purpose of the execution is to protect innocent lives. If we failed to execute them, then we just killed innocent people.


22) Some opponents claims that the execution won’t bring the victims back. This is not what it is about. It’s about preventing any more deaths of innocent people.

23) Opponents have argued that capital punishment did not stop murderers and pedophiles. Neither has the prison stopped people from stealing or making tax frauds, but you don’t see them abolishing prisons.

24) The opponents argues that it is expensive to execute someone. This is extremely false because the life in prison is a long time and the money goes pretty high as 5 million or more. The death penalty is less than a million.

25) To support the death penalty, you care about the innocents, not the murderers.

The flaws in God’s plan

We are told that God has plans for everybody from the time they’re born to the time they die. If God exists and he does indeed have plans, then there are few flaws in his plan; free will and prayer.

If God exists, then the plans from the bible are all in order. God tells Adam and Eve not to eat the tree of knowledge between good and evil, but he also planned them to disobey them by using the devil and then condemns them. All of these were planned. God also plans the world wide flood then claims he made a mistake after the flood.

He also plans Jesus Christ’s death by crucifixion to save our souls from the “Sin” and yet, he has us condemned from following his plans anyway.

If God truly exists ever, then I being an atheist was his plan. He also plans me to write this book, criticizing God’s plans, the doctrine of Christianity, and criticizing God himself. But if that were true, then I am to be blameless.

Also, the devil is blameless, because God plans people to be possessed by the devil and plans catholic priests to molest our children, he even plans murderers, rapists, and pedophiles to do his bidding and they too are not to blame because this is all God’s plan.

God planned Adolf Hitler to murder millions of Jews, God planned the hijackers to fly the plane into our world trade centers, God plans Christians to murder gays, atheists, Witches, heretics, and so on for centuries.

God plans abortions, and then has us fight against it, plans diseases and we fight against it, and death penalty, gay marriage, and so on were planned, including these who opposed. Do any of these make any sense to you?


The problem with the plan is that we do not have free will. If God doesn’t have a plan, then we are to blame for our free will, which we should, because we alone are responsible for our actions. It should be our free will to decide for our own actions. This makes better sense since all the plans of God contradicts everything and serves no purpose to anybody.

Another flaw in God’s plan is prayer. If God has a plan, then why would he abandon the plan to answer your prayers? If God answers prayers, then the plans are ignored. However, some Christians will say God plans us to pray anyway. Unfortunately, God ignores it and uses the Tsunami to drown the people in Asia pacific and use the Hurricane Katrina to drown devoted Christians and other non-Christians in New Orleans anyway.

If God exists, then the plan in question is unavoidable. We are planned from the start to do God’s bidding without free will of our own, and then condemn us for following his plans. So he made me an atheist, then will condemn me to hell, he plans people to be Gay, then condemns them all, he plans everything a person is then subjects them to be humiliated for their glasses, wearing specific attire, being in wheelchair, being short or tall, and so on. God plans us to be killing people, raping people, molesting people, and so on.


Why would God plan us to commit such repulsive actions and then have us fight against these repulsive actions? Why would God make us support and oppose death penalty, gay marriage, abortion, and so on? Why would God make us be mindless and murderous about certain things like evolution being taught in schools, abortion clinics and gay clubs?

If you think about it as an intelligent person, you will realize that the statement "It is part of God's plan" is one of those meaningless palliatives. When you sit down and think it through using your common sense, the statement makes no sense.

Let me point out that God’s plan is meaningless because if God drowns a child so that we can learn that we should keep watch on our children, then why did it continue? What reason is there for God to plan children’s death by sex offenders? We know it is wrong, but it continues on. It must mean God doesn’t intend to teach us what to understand, he just likes making our lives a living hell.
Why does God plague us with diseases and make us cure it and then plague us with more diseases? Why does God allow children to suffer? God’s entire plan is meaningless.

More on morality: Morality in the bible

Let’s suppose you have a child, and that child talks back to you, disobeys your rules in the house, then the Bible tells you to stone him to death. If you refuse to kill your child, then you decided to defy your lord, your God. In the Bible, it tells us to stone the bride on her father’s doorstep if she is found not to be a virgin. The bible endorses oppression of women, slavery, selling your daughters to sexual slavery, and stoning heretics, adulterers, homosexuals, Sabbath breakers, witches, followers of Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, and all other imaginary crimes.

Let’s say you refuse to do any of these things, you probably think these do not apply because it was just the Old Testament and that it’s a Jewish bible. The problem is, the Bible is made by God and by God’s word, you must do as he said as written in the Bible. So why defy him? Because you knew it was wrong and that you knew it was written in ancient times, you admit God is not a perfect being, nor was he an all loving, all merciful, all knowing God. Yet, you still believe in God and that you think God is all loving, all powerful, all knowing God anyway. How can this be? Maybe you want to believe this book was really just a book written by misguided primitive men, not God and that God is not what the Bible says. But the Bible is precisely what made you believe in God in the first place.

You cannot decide for yourself how you want your God to be, that is for your God to decide for himself. Why speak for him? Why pretend the Bible isn’t God’s word?
Some of the Christians still follows the laws of the old testament today, some even believes that Jesus Christ will come to earth to judge the living and the dead.
Why do some Christians ignore what is written in the Bible? Because they believe some still applies and some don’t. Some believes the Bible never contains such horrible passage that today’s society never accepts. Some never even read the Bible, only learned from those who taught them if not their parents, but where did the parents get the idea about God? The Bible.

You cannot pretend the Bible doesn’t contain such atrocity and the violent laws, nor can you pick what you like and neglect the rest. The Bible is suppose to be an inspired word of God, and yet, it doesn’t leave us in awe by its inspiration and brilliant wisdom, it just left us with disgusting tales of Moses leading an army to kill thousands of men and male children and women who slept with men, and raping virgin girls. And another tale about Abraham attempting to kill his son Isaac without hesitation just because God told him to do it, and so on.

Many Christians today still tries to keep their faith alive, but knows things are changing, and that new scientific facts clears up some problems we have today, we no longer own slaves or oppress women or kill atheists and gays. So why keep God? Because they don’t want to part from their imaginary friend. It is time we grow up, it is time we listen to truth.

Why must we pretend the Bible is the perfect word of the creator while we defy the laws God has given us? You can’t have it both ways, and if you think you can, then tell me why you would believe God is perfect and is all loving while ignoring the Bible that speaks of owning slaves and killing heretics? Because it’s all metaphors? Because it doesn’t apply? Because Jesus did away with the Old Testaments?
I can understand that you wanted there to be a God who loves us, who has the power to protect us. I can understand you want to believe there is a place called Heaven.
Jesus did not do away with the old Testaments. Reread the New Testament and you will find that Jesus expects us to follow the Old Testament laws, and Jesus never did say Slavery was wrong or that women deserve equality.

Why exorcism is bull

The chilling growls, the cuts on their flesh, their violent attitude is frightening, and they speak in languages people didn’t know they could speak, and the comforting truth is… it is all full of crap.
Let me point out the problem here; there is no proof that any demons or the devil ever truly existed.
So why did the Christians or other religious believers believe the demons are out there, possessing us?

Let’s look into the past about the whole demon possession.
People back then did not know what dementia is, nor do they realize what is hallucinations are. They thought the voices in their head were the demon or god.
Another one is that they don’t know what is mental illness is. People who have seizures, people who were blind, deaf, or mute, people who foams at the mouth, people who are just mentally insane are believed to be all possessions of the devil.
Sadly today, most Christians still believe the devil exists and the demons are out to get us.

Religious leaders tells us that we have demons latching onto us like leeches, they tell us that the devil is out there and we must worship God and Jesus Christ to fight against him.

68% of the people in America believe Satan exists and he is out to get us. Satan is a same term for the boogeyman to children. It is just a scare tactic to keep believers from being “sinful.”

How does one know when somebody is possessed? They hear voices that aren’t there, they see things that aren’t there. The mind plays tricks on us, and it plays a mean through trick that lasted for thousands of years, and still going. The negative emotions, the drama, and among other things, living your life is a presumption that you’re possessed by the demon.

But that is not all, sometimes, some will try getting other people’s attention by pretending to be possessed. Why? Because the more they pay attention to them, the better.

As for the unusual things like the animal growls, speaking in different languages, cuts on their body, some claims they levitate or walk on water, and so on.
When I saw a video of the guy speaking about exorcism, he claims that some has levitated or walked on water. He never proved it because he never showed it. Plus we never saw any supernatural thing like levitation or walking on water, it was all talk. You can’t make up stuff and pass it off as true, you need to present credible, verifiable concrete evidence in person. Since there has been no evidence of any actual demon possessions, people who performs the exorcisms are just embarrassing themselves with their delusional belief.

I know that exorcisms are false because the videos I’ve seen shows people only growling and snarling and standing around in front of a priest who just threw a book at them, puts his or her hands on their foreheads and chanting nonsense, putting crosses to their faces, and sprinkling the “Holy” water.

This is how an exorcist performs. He shouts at the possessed, hurts the possessed, claiming that if you hurt the victim you hurt the demons, and he throws water, vinegar, and books at them.

They say exorcism takes years to learn, so it must be difficult to throw books or shout at people.

After I seen several videos, I see no supernatural things occurring, I see nothing more than people growling, Just growling. Exorcism is false, or at least Penn Jillette might say, “Bullshit.”

Allow me to debunk those who claimed that that who spoke in different languages or made animal sounds, it is very easy to make animal sounds. In many movies, the actors who perform in films by making animal sounds were just doing their performance, so were they possessed? No, they were not. When people like Robin William who can do voices, he wasn’t possessed. As for speaking in different languages, anybody can learn to speak a language. Just because you knew the person, doesn’t mean you knew what language they actually knew. Not everybody knew I can speak a little Japanese or French.

Another thing I will debunk, they wanted to blame their troubles or other people’s problems on the devil. For an example, some people will say they think someone they knew was possessed because they went to jail for a crime they did, or that someone they knew were “Not themselves anymore.” Allow me to clear this matter up; everybody is a human being with problems and we have our share of trouble with many other people like authority. Just because someone broke the law or seem to behave differently, doesn’t mean they are possessed. It just means they have problems.

We are all responsible for our own actions, not some imaginary friends. If you claim someone is possessed because they just went to jail, you’re sadly misguided from the fact; they broke the law willingly and perhaps intentionally, there is nothing supernatural about that. Whenever a teen acts out, it is just a rebellious teenage phases, not some demon possession.

If you know someone who drinks alcohol, then they will behave differently because alcohol affects them, making them aggressive and/or abusive, not because demons were possessing them.

In the show Penn and Teller bullshit, they also have this lady who tells little children that their imaginary friends are actually demons and that they needed to be chased out. Penn said that she is the one who needs to be chased out. I agree with him.

Does anyone also notice that most Christians who believe in demon possession actually believed themselves or someone they knew to be actually possessed? Wouldn’t you think that millions of us atheists would be possessed since we are the ones who disbelieve in God and Jesus Christ? If you are smart, you will realize just how Exorcism turns out to be false.

Since many Christians believes Atheists like us are possessed by the devil, one would easily look no further than the homes of all who claims there to be possessions are in Christian homes, not atheist’s homes.

If I am possessed, then why have I not heard anything scary voices of demons or Satan? Why had I not find myself in prison for some crimes I didn’t know I did? I have a job, I write stories, I just sleep, eat, do a bit of work out, and not once did I steal or raped or killed anybody. I never will do that either.
The thing is, Satan is a deceiver and a temptation. I was told if I saw a dollar, I would pick it up because Satan would want me to. This is false because there is no crime in it, nothing illegal about finding money on the ground. Satan is supposed to be evil, like lead me to temptation like rape or murder. But that never happened did it? This is another I just debunked.

There is no devil, no such supernatural phenomenon, only those who believes it believes themselves to be possessed, and all actions are done by our own intention and free will.

Why would God hate?

It is a simple reason; people hate people, so they wanted their God to hate those they hate. For absolutely no reason whatsoever, they wanted to make their prejudice excusable by saying, “God hates Gays.” Or whatever.

In the Bible, it has a lot of hate spoken against gays, non-believers, adulterers, stubborn teenagers, and all others for no apparent reason. It did not say why God hates Gays; it just simply said it was “An abomination.” My question is what is abnormal about homosexuality? It didn’t even explain why We atheists are wrong to disbelieve in God. Also it didn’t explain why children are worth stoning just because they are disobedient.

Children are all disobedient in their teenage years simply because it is a way life is. If teens gets too attached to their parents, they would not survive in the real world. This isn’t to say they shouldn’t love, they should love their parents and treat them with respect. That is if parents are not abusive just because they can’t tolerate their teens being themselves, following their own paths, their own goals. Children are not made to do every little thing their parents’ wishes. This is why it is ridiculous to get angry with your kids for being disobedient.

This is why I cannot understand why we should stone our children. Even though today we don’t stone them, parents still hurts their kids for a little disobedience. Try learning about your teen, try understanding their feeling instead of being childish.
What I saw in the gay community are just friendly people enjoying life just like everybody else. So what is with the hating? As far as I can tell, The Bible is written in ancient times where people could never understand anything like the disabled people, gays, people whom are left-handed, people with mental illness, and so on. Back then, they believed the earth was flat, that the earth was the center of the universe, that everything that happens in nature is by supernatural.

There is no reason to hate something that was written centuries or thousands of years ago. What they say is not worth listening to. Today we realize differently than people centuries before had learned.

Today we knew that mental illness is a cause by nature, back then, we thought it was demon possession, when people are blind or cannot hear, we thought demon possession.
We have advanced modern medicine, they don’t. We knew about science, they do not.
So why did they listen to the bible? Because they believed it was written by God. They believe their God wants them to obey the bible or burn in hell.

Fortunately there are many Christians who ignore things in the bible for better reason. However, since they believe in their God, they pretend the bible is just a metaphor for something else, not meant to be taken seriously.

What bothers is me, if it is just a metaphor, then why did the bible contradict itself? What is a metaphor for all these deaths in the bible? What’s metaphoric about Lot having sex with his daughters? What is metaphoric for drowning infants in the world wide flood just because they were “Wicked?”

As for those who claim that God love, they simply make the claims by confusing their own feelings to their God’s. Surely it is good to see people being open minded and more accepting than these who claims God “Hates” like Fred Phelps, the most repulsive man on the planet, physically and mentally.

The god does not hate nor does he love, because it is a human feeling. Why would an all powerful creator who creates the universe hate?

A creator who can create Earth and make life, does not need to hate or love because there isn’t a reason to. Can an artist hate what he or she has painted? Can a writer condemn their written characters they’ve made? No, because it makes no sense. Also love isn’t important when drawing or writing or whatever, because it is art. Simply just a creation we make for ourselves. If there is a God ever, he would be more like these artists or writers, just simply creating just for himself.

A God who hates is not worth worshipping, and the bible is full of hate. The bible is proof it is written by many men who knew nothing more than what 5 year old children do. Because hate is a human emotion, and their ugly hatred for gays, atheists, adulterers, and disobedient children are childish and sad.

Thursday, April 2, 2009

Ideas I believe would be better

The ideas I believe would be better for this country, but I’m not assuming it’s the best idea, but these ideas I believe are what I believe personally, what is the best for this country.

I strongly believe we need smaller government because the bigger the government is, the more power they use against us.

I want people to stop tearing apart the bill of rights or the constitution because these are made precisely what made this country as it is. It’s the land of the free, not the land of power of corruption or even religion. The important thing is, is the ideas we all want what’s best for the country. I know, we all have different ideas and they may conflict, I know we can’t please everybody, and most certainly, nothing would make the country look like some pathetic, goofy looking cartoon where everything looks peaceful.

I want the government to stop trying to pay religion, stop trying to make law against things based on personal dislikes. The laws should be about protecting people from people who wants to control us, kill us, or even violate human rights. I want there to be no more wars on petty things like personal interests like drugs, porn, prostitution, and such. These are personal interest by people who chooses them individually. You can’t just take them away just because you don’t like them.

I want the police, the policy makers, government, to focus on real dangers around us like the murder, pedophilia, thieves, rapists, everything that violates human rights. Prositution is not a violation on human rights, it’s forcing a person to be a prostitute is a violation of human rights. Using drugs is not a violation of any kind, because people makes the choice what to put in their body like alcohol and cigarettes. People should be allowed to watch porn without the government treating them like criminals, including those who seeks service from prostitute.

I believe that the Christianity needs to be told to shut up when trying to enforce their religious beliefs and so called laws into the government to enforce that onto us. I’m not saying that Christianity can’t do what they want, they can do what they want except violate human rights or forcing their beliefs down people’s throats.

People should also make the choice without being forced against their will. And none of the, “You’re either with us or against us.” Bullshit because nobody is with you or against you.

What made this country great is the freedom to choose, speak, bear arms, and such and taking that away violates that which made this country great.

The problem of the ten commandments

From the problems of the Ten Commandments is that, people who wrote the Bible claims that Moses went up Mount Sinai to get commandments from the God. What got me suspicious is that Moses told people that only he is allowed to go up the mount Sinai and anyone else who goes up will die or something like that. That sounds like something a liar would cook up in order to keep people from realizing that he is a deceitful con artist. It makes absolutely no sense that people can’t go up the mount Sinai and have God tell them his laws himself. What’s wrong with that idea? What are those people hiding? I’m pretty sure I’ll be getting a, “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtains.” Kind of talk from these religious folks.

Now, as for the Commandments, it was supposed to be a perfect moral law there is. But the first four has nothing to do with morality, it just has to do with pleasing a childish God.

Thou Shalt Have no other Gods before me.

That indicates that God wants what he wants, not what is best for people. He’s jealous and sounds like a jerk to me than a God worthy of praise and worship.

Thou shalt not make yourself graven images.

It seems to me that this God hates drawings, sculptures, anything that is art. But why? What does this have to do with morality? And doesn’t every Christian realize that everything is really Graven Images? Statues of Jesus, Statues of Virgin Mary, Statues of many religious icons, Religious arts on Candles, stained glass windows in Churches, I can go on. All of them is considered Graven Images. And every one of them who believes in the Bible, the Ten Commandments wants to put it everywhere. This is ironically stupid.

Thou shalt Not say the Lord’s name in Vain.

So if someone uses your name in Vain, it’s bad? Why is God so concerned on how people say things? Why would stuff like “God damnit” and “Jesus Christ” be so unsettling to them? We humans can take the offensiveness, but it seems that God can’t. I bet he even cannot take a Joke either.

Thou shalt Remember the Sabbath Day and to keep it Holy.

So that means we can’t do anything on the Sabbath day. But that means patients can’t be taken care of, Criminals can take advantage of that day because of no police work, people all over the world would have to stop working. But to do that, would destroy many things, it would be disastrous. I don’t even understand why we have to stop working on the Sabbath day, it seems to me that this God isn’t all knowing or intelligent. If he exists, and is all knowing, then he would not say remember the Sabbath day and keep it holy.

There are couple of other things that has nothing to do with morality, or at least complicates the perspective of what is moral in these terms.

Honor thy father and thy mother.

Honor and respect has to be earned. You don’t need to just honor someone of authority, just because they have responsibility over you. Some can be good, some are bad, so not all can be honored.

Thou shall not kill.

Now this is what I was just saying earlier. The perspective of the moral issue here is, you cannot murder for profit, passion, or compulsiveness. But when it comes to protecting your fellow man, yourself, your country, you can take the life of those who threatens to kill.

Also, the problem of this Commandment is, Christians and all other Religious believers murders innocent people for their God(s). Clearly, they broke all of the commandments in a heartbeat. It’s ironic and strange because to believe and worship and follow the laws, you would think they would not kill people when their God(s) clearly states that they should not. However, their God tells them to kill as well, which contradicts their demand of no killing. See? It’s ironic.

Thou shalt not bear false witness against your neighbor.

While it is true that you shouldn’t make false accusations or lie, it seems to me that Christians and many other people of different beliefs and people who disbelieve in any Gods lies or makes accusations against another. Christians are accusing us Atheists or other people for the disasters they (these Christians) have caused.

Thou Shalt not steal

However, the idea is moral, but stealing can also be beneficial depending on reason. If I stole documents from the corruptive Organization or the government and provided it to the media or the authority, I could stop disastrous things they planned on doing. Or I can steal food to feed my family when we have no money. However, the bad reason for stealing is profit, power, thrill, or corruption. And that is precisely what many Religious organizations and some politicians are doing.

Thou shall not Commit Adultery

Problem is, everybody has different ideas about love, sex, marriage, and relationships. In fact, some do not care if you slept with one another.

Thou shall not covet thy neighbor’s wife, house, and possessions.

Actually, that is bad for economy, because you are supposed to covet thy neighbor’s possessions. That is how economy works, that is how you build trade and make profits. Also, people like other countries as well, and love to have some of their things and vice versa. So what is wrong with that? Can I not want what my neighbors have? A nice laptop, or comfy couch? If I see what I want, I want to get it. From stores that is.

Wednesday, April 1, 2009

What atheism really is.

Atheists simply do not believe in the existence of a God or any gods. In fact, everybody in the world is an atheist in a certain term. Only difference is, i disbelieve in all of the Deities. Christians disbelieve in the existence of all other gods except their own, one religion after another, they disbelieve others religion and their deity as well.

I have noticed that some Christians believes that Atheists are violent people who wants to destroy religion and morality. This is ironic, because Christians themselves have been violently attacking evolution being taught in science classes, abortion clinics, gay clubs, and the atheists. As for the morality, it's rather amusing and quite bullshit to believe that atheists wants to destroy morality. What morality does one follow? Everybody has their own ideas about morality, only thing we can all agree on is murder is wrong, so is stealing, and abusing one another. However, some Christians believes that Morality comes from their God. The problem with that is, their God is as about as moral as Adolf Hitler.

Also, i was told by a christian that atheists have been wanting to kill Christians, which they believe was written in their books. I've read their books. There is not one shred of evidence of their desire to murder innocent people. This Christian clearly thinks when Sam Harris said, "We should abandon Religion," he means abandoning the notion of a magical sky daddy. He is not inducing some war on religion. Atheists do not wish to kill anyone. You can't kill someone in the name of Atheism. But apparently, Christians thinks you can. No, you can not. Atheism is not a religion, Atheism is not some group of criminals, they are people who disbelieve in a God. Christians madly tries to cover their ears about the violence done in the name of God, while point the finger of accusation against atheists. They point their finger at them, because they believe they lack morality.

Morality is not given by some divine interpretation or guidance, it is by human sympathy and personal experience. To say God is moral while making crusades, inquisitions, holy wars, witch hunts, and attacks on innocent people is not moral. Atheists does not do that. In fact, Atheists have no reason to want to harm people in the name of Atheism. It makes absolutely no sense. Disbelievers simply just disbelieve. Everything else is by personal affair.

I'm an atheist, and i do not wish to go harming another person, even my dad, who too is an atheist, does not wish harm onto another fellow human being.

I don't think religion has its uses in this world, but that does not mean i want Christians or other religious believers dead. Their religion is slowly dying out on its own, merely because of Christians themselves. I abandoned religion because of the Christians. But i never wish them harm. My grandparents and my great grandparents believes in the God, but i love them regardless. I personally do not care about what people believes in, as long as they do not harm another. That is why Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, and other atheists are trying to say from the beginning. It's harmful, it's ridiculous, it's unnecessary, and more importantly it is bullshit.

Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Prostitution

At first, i was totally against prostitution. The reason was because i believed women were forced into it, humiliated and abused. However, the reason i decided to write about legalizing it is because the only reason it's illegal is because of religious hatred against sex.

It's stupid to criminalize something that consenting adults wishes to do, even when it's about money. The reason why i was against the prostitution was because i thought it was violent, filled with diseases, and it's slavery. But that was only because it was illegal, not because it was legal. I was only looking at the result of prostitution being illegal. I never saw it when it was legal. When i watched Penn and Teller about prostitution, i came to think about how much sense they made about legalizing prostitution.

Violence and crime that occur ed with prostitution does not mean that it is the way it is. When it comes to applying for jobs, there is potential risks of violence, coming in contact with bodily fluids, accidents, or handling dangerous objects or operating machinery. Every job has risks. It may seem like saying that jobs looks more safer than prostitution, that's only because we have regulations, rights, and laws on our side and the prostitution is illegal. If you legalize prostitution, not only would the law can protect prostitutes, they can also get health benefits. Sex for money is just business, like massage, chiropractor, being a doctor, tattoo artist, body pierce place, which all comes in physical contact with another human being.

There are some who claims that legalizing prostitution would mean demanding children for prostitution. That is not exactly true, because that sort of thing is pretty rare. It is sad that it happened in this country as well as in all other countries, but legalizing prostitution does not promote child prostitution. It's illegal with reason; children are mentally and physically under developed and they can't really make the choice as an adult would. I'm against even allowing teenagers being prostitutes more because they are not mentally developed. Seems harsh to them, but they should give more time to think about it as well.

It is really understandable that people can feel that sex for money is not pretty, but not a bad thing either. It's only bad because it's illegal.

It's not just the women who are having sex for money, straight guys, lesbians, and gay guys are doing it too. It shows that a) they made the choice b) it's not degrading or like slavery c) it's safe and healthy when legal. The only reason why it's not safe or healthy was because they are neglected the right to protection and medical benefits. Give them that, and you will see for yourself just how safe and clean they would be. It's not too different from hazardous jobs, but it's better than criminalizing something people enjoy doing.

When it comes to people committing rape, murder, abuse, drug abuse on prostitutes, it is because of the criminalizing of prostitutes. Arresting prostitutes only decreases their chances of employments, so they stay prostitutes longer, plus it turns them over to drug uses and being attacked. The reason why prostitutes are attacked by criminals is because they are easy pickings. Legalize and protect them, then criminals cannot touch them. Just as criminals can't touch us without getting law to bite them.

Another thing about why we should legalize prostitution is because of the Constitution. They have the right to choice sex for money. The fact is, the better they are legal, the lower crime rates it would be. While bad things will still happen, it would lesser if legal. Check out the brothels in Nevada where it is peaceful and safe. They get regular frequent check ups, crime is very low, people are treated with respect there. No abuse, well protected, and peaceful.

Shouldn't we be legalizing something like that instead of listening to religious people who says sex is a sin?

When it comes down to relationships and sex, everybody has completely different views about it. For those who seeks services from prostitutes, they are those who are unsuccessful in relationships, those who gone through divorces, some who doesn't like commitment, some who are busy and can't have a relationship, married men who likes to have sex behind his wife's back, and so on. Everybody has different views. Nothing is perfect, even if we decriminalize prostitution. Everything has it's pros and cons, and always we will have pros and cons.

As for the degrading women, it's pure bullshit. The fact is, people have sex because they want to. How does that degrade women? Also there are far more degrading things than sex for money. Cleaning up animal feces, being some one's maid or butler, being maintenance in stores, a bagger. I've worked as a maintenance in Wal Mart and a Bagger in Fry's and i felt degraded and miserable.

Morality

Let me define morality in Christians term; Believe God, or be damned to hell. They also believe that they have to shove their belief down people's throat in order to "save their soul" which is the most asinine idea. The Christians believes that without God, there can be no morality. Which brings up to this point.

God's definition of morality is you have to believe in God, you have to not engage into any consensual activity between adults, you should not be homosexual, in other words, you can't take control of your own life. But that is not all; in the Bible it advocates violence against another while saying you should not murder, also advocates prejudice while also saying you should not judge and to love your neighbor, it advocates sacrifices, misogyny, slavery, putting people to death for victimless crimes such as disbelief, drawing images, witchcraft, disobedience from children, and more. This is the idea of God's morality, but the irony is, Christians don't follow it while in the same time, they say God is moral.

Here is something people may overlook; Christians who claims that they are peaceful and that they believe God is moral, they also attack schools for teaching evolution. They believe it is the work of the devil trying to lead children away from God. While there is no evidence of the devil or the attempt to convert children to atheism, they forget that education is about teaching facts, not fantasy. The reason Creationism is purely fantasy, is because they claim that the earth is 6000 years old and two humans come from the Garden with a magical tree and a talking snake and a hand of an invisible god. It also indicated that the Grand Canyon is made in few days during the world wide flood. First off, there is no evidence of the world wide flood and you can't possibly make a Grand Canyon in few days with powerful blast from water.

They also attack Abortion clinics because they believe Abortion is murder. Abortion is a hideous thing to be sure, but not worth bombing. These doctors are not getting off on slaughtering unborn babies, nor were the pregnant women. A blastocyst is a collection of cells, not fully human. It has no brains or neurons. There is no reason to bomb abortion clinics and it only shows how religion hurts more than helps.

They also attack atheists and homosexuals because they are what religious believers uses the term, "Sinner" which is only because God says it is. Christians don't seem to mind that their God wants to mindlessly hate gays and non believers and will mindlessly follow him unconditionally. It's terrifying, absolutely terrifying. "I don't hate them, God hates them." is the word from a Christians. This is the terrifying thing to hear. It shows she will do anything she thinks God hates regardless of her own judgment. I would love to give Christians a piece of advice, "Think for yourself, before mindlessly attacking harmless people with deluded paranoia and fable myths, and do some research (Not the Bible) people." But that will never happen.

Morality is very complex and not something that is set in stones. Everybody has their own ideas about what is moral. The problem is, when it comes to debating about morality, Christians covers their ears because they strongly believe they are moral and all others are not.

Thursday, January 29, 2009

pro-death penalty arguments

The death penalty argument
Pro-capital punishment

By Tim Friday




“You will make a murderer of us all.”

I do not agree because to murder is to unlawfully kill someone. We are executing a criminal which a state decided is the right punishment. Keep in mind that the justice system is not going around tagging human beings and gassing them or shooting them or hanging them like the Nazi and their concentration camps. In fact, there is no evidence to prove that the government is obliterating people, or creating massive human extermination or psychological terror. All that is just a make believe excuse to abolish the death penalty. Nothing is perfect; nothing in this country is all peaceful. There is always violence, always so many deaths.
As for the murderer sentenced to death, automatically we’re a murderer for killing him. I find this to be rather illogical. If executing a murderer for a crime they committed is the same as the murderer murdering innocent victims, then that makes no sense. If we execute a murderer, we are eliminating a threat. The major difference between murdering an innocent person and executing a heinous criminal, is that the murderers likes to cause suffering, we do not. They want to kill more people, we do not. They do not care about innocent people, we do. They don’t want to function in this society, but we do. We care about people, we grieve for the loss of innocent people because of them. To want murderers to go unpunished is to pity them and feel sorry for them for nothing.
The death penalty is a punishment for a criminal who deserves death. This isn’t revenge, hatred, and the people who execute them are not going about saying, “This is fun, we should kill more people.”
When it comes down to punishments, we have to take measure to ensure that criminals get what they deserved. If they were a thief, they should get year in jail. Note that we don’t believe they deserve a death penalty because it is inhumane and ridiculous for a crime so minor. So where is it that we’re obliterating people here? When someone gets a DUI or carjackers stealing a car, they don’t get the death penalty because it just doesn’t make any sense. When we are executing a criminal, we’re executing a person who has done real heinous crime of taking a life, even violating them and prison will not prevent him from killing again.
And lastly, if we kill a murderer, then what does it say when a murderer killed an innocent person? That murderer would then have made you all murderers as well. It sort of conflicts that argument doesn’t it?

“Innocent people get executed on Death Row.”

“The prosecutors withhold evidence, the point is, they all wanted to try to win and they sentenced innocent people to death.” Yes prosecutors do try withholding evidences, but if that is the case, then we all sentenced only innocents to death. We did not. In fact, the innocent people are exonerated from the death row. That is the good thing because we’re paying closer attention to the fact we wrongly put an innocent person on death row. Human makes error, but we shouldn’t abolish the death penalty just because some stupid prosecutors wanted to win the case like it’s a game. A crime is not a game. And I agree that lawyers and prosecutors all want to win the case, and it disgusts me.
The trials should be about fairness and showing evidence for the defendant’s innocence or guilt. To treat this as a game, they should never be prosecutors or lawyers. If all they care about was winning the case, they really shouldn’t be prosecuting anybody. We want to execute truly heinous criminal, not innocent people. And if the abolitionists are worried about innocent people being found guilty when not, then we shouldn’t have courts, laws, or death penalty. We should just allow killers to go on ahead and kill us all.
To claim that we are cool with executing some innocent people is untrue. The fact is, we rely on evidence against the criminals, sometimes some their proofs of innocence were found later after death or when they’re still on death row and it is our mistake. But we shouldn’t abolish the death penalty just because there is a good risk innocent people will die. In fact, there are risks in everything we all do in day to day living. If you’re worried about innocent people dying then let’s remove cars, swimming pools, every inanimate objects that can be harmful to them. Let’s just put innocent people in a padded room with straightjackets and dozen guards. The point is, we can’t all guarantee that not all innocent people won’t be on death row. We’re all humans, the justice system is made of humans, but we all want to live in a good society, we all want to not have people trying to kill us. And in order to do these things, we need to take the risks for the benefit of the society.
For some who are against the death penalty thinks that most criminals are likely to be either innocent or would seek redemption after years in prison. There are criminals who got out of prison and reoffended again. They reoffend like a wolf on a prowl for meat. They act like they can’t get enough or they can’t control themselves or it was their natural instincts. How do I know? Name one person who ever truly seek redemptions for their wrongdoing to the victims and the society. Now granted some minor criminals can redeem themselves, but murderers, pedophiles, and rapists cannot because they don’t want to. They killed because they wanted to. There was no reason to. No way does their action helps build this society into a stronger, healthier, and better place to live in. Nobody wants to be killed, raped, or molested. No one even deserves it. So why do you think that heinous criminals don’t deserve the death penalty?
These are good reasons for taking a risk, and releasing criminals is not one of them.
1) Their actions hurts us all
2) This society has no place for murderers, rapists or pedophiles except prison or death

Now many innocents have been wrongly executed years ago, but this is due to lack of things we have today. In this century, less and less innocents were sent to death row. The thing is, death penalty may carry risks, but so does everything else. In fact, abolitionists seem to want criminals to be just kept in prison. Unfortunately those criminals are released and paroled and they have killed again. So if you’re going to worry about innocent lives, you should worry about not the ones on death row but of those exposed to danger of released and paroled criminals.
Also, if you’re worried about the deaths of innocent people on death row then I wonder how you felt about car wrecks, electricity, weaponry, fire, drowning, disease, natural disasters, and so much that took millions of lives each year. Innocent people are already dying due to everything else. The death row is the least of everyone’s worries. Because this sounds like to me that the abolitionists are more concerned for murderers than innocents. They ignore that everybody is dying or in danger from every dangerous things around us, they just rather we don’t execute their precious murderers. Of all the risks we take in this world, the death penalty is the least concern for us all.
We all want to survive, and we all want to live safely, but in order to do that, we must take the risks and push on forward. As for death row, is different because we should not to take the risk for releasing a dangerous criminal just because an abolitionist doesn’t like death penalty. We want to live, not be killed by someone released from prison. Why take risk of driving? Because we want to go places. Why risk swimming? Because it’s fun to swim. Why risk performing surgery where there is sometimes a good chance it won’t be successful? So we can recover.
I do believe we need to protect those accused until evidence proves them innocent or guilty. Granted, sometimes some of the accused could be indeed innocent. I believe however that just because we cannot find evidence against the accused doesn’t mean they are not guilty. I do not pretend to know everything about the law and the justice system, and on that note I know very little. But don’t misunderstood me, because even when I know little, doesn’t mean I don’t know what I am talking about.
Do I seem like I wanted people to just die because they are accused? I said earlier I don’t want innocent people to die, but I also don’t want the truly heinous criminal to walk free. They should never walk free. If we let them go because some bleeding hearted anti-death penalty abolitionist says, “We can’t kill them, it is wrong and we sink to their levels, don’t kill them in my name, death penalties makes murderers of us all.” Then that convicted heinous criminal goes free on their account and we all just became a true murderer. How? We just sacrificed innocent lives.

“The death penalty is a human rights violation,
Death devices can go wrong.”

Now while it is true that the death devices can botch criminals, strangle criminals instead of just snapping their neck, or feel excruciating pain instead of just peaceful eternal sleep. To let this be a problem is to say, “We need to do this nicely.” We don’t want to do this nicely, we want them to die for the crime they committed. Now note that there are less and less electrocutions, less hangings, and less gassing. The purpose of using lethal injections the most is because it was known to put down animals. Abolitionists claim that it’s not peaceful and that it’s excruciating. I had yet to do research on that yet. But there are other humane ways to execute a murderer like the guillotine for example.
Why is it that we need to feel sorry for murderers and pedophiles? They mercilessly violated human rights, they don’t care that it hurts us, they don’t care about the grieving families or traumatized victims. All they ever truly care about is doing harm to innocent people for their own amusement, profit, passion, or compulsive purposes. None of those are sufficient enough to pity the killer, not in the slightest bit way.
They are criminals and the death penalty is a penalty not an “Oh we’re going to kill you but we’re going to do it nicely.” A criminal who commits heinous crimes sentenced to death should not be treated as sacred cows and we are some Hindus. The important thing is, they committed a crime, and there is no going back, no taking back. They will not change because their crime was intentional though unreasonable and horrible.
Note that this is just a thought experiment; my family is alive and fine. Let’s just say that if my family gets killed by a murderer, why do you think I should pity that killer? Now that my family is dead, there is no going back, and the killer did this for no good reason. My family are an innocent hardworking civilians. We all know they don’t deserve death. The reason why that killer should die is because a) he killed innocent people. B) There is no doubt he’ll kill again because he has killed innocent people who had nothing to do with them. What is going to stop him from killing again? Where does it even end? C) Prison is not a perfect place for heinous criminals because they can escape, get parole, be released, or kill inmates and prison guards. Do I also want that killer to die? Not only do I want him to die, but I want no one to suffer. The point is, murderers, pedophiles, and rapists have no right to live their life because they do not respect the human rights, they do not value innocent people. They kill because they like to, and prison will not stop them.
I’m not indicating we shouldn’t have prisons; don’t assume I am being contradicting here. The point is, they escape, get parole, be released, and kill inmates. So what is left for them but the death penalty?
There is an anti-death penalty group who says we are killing criminals in cruel and inhumane ways. The question is, how? As oppose to saying what they did to innocent people? Some drags their victims into the night, violates them, rapes them, and even murders them. What we do is put them to sleep. Inhumane? Not even close. Cruel? Not even close. Not even close to what they’ve done. We’re not violating them, we did not even did anything other than execute them for the crime they committed.
As for the execution devices, we are using no hangings, no electrocution, no gassing or at least we shouldn’t. Because those are indeed inhumane, but there are humane ways to kill a murderer and lethal injections aren’t just only one of them of course, there is a guillotine because a quick decapitation is instant death. Yes it is bloody but they do not suffer. There are some who says lethal injections doesn’t really put a person to sleep. In fact they said in autopsies, the criminal suffered. There are hundreds of criminals dead by lethal injections and only few autopsies done shows some suffered. I do not have evidence to say it is true or untrue. I do however know that lethal injections are not the only way to kill a murderer humanely.

“It is wrong to kill a human being.”

Then by all means don’t bother defending yourself or those you love. If you believe if it’s ok to kill in self defense or when you’re at war, then what is different about executing those who violated human rights? Let’s say the soldiers out at war are killing the people their leaders tells them, there are massive dead people and no doubt many may be frightened innocent civilian who is forced to kill against their will but we do not know. Now look at the death penalty. War and execution is not the same thing because we’re executing a heinous criminal for their crime, soldiers are killing many people they don’t even know. To say you don’t think we should kill a human being is to imply that we’re to leave ourselves to the mercy of those who violates human rights and kills us.
What is a human being? To me, we’re nothing special. We’re no better than dogs, or cats, or horses, or whatever animal there is. We are animals, and every animal kills each other for survival. The killer instinct exists in all species, including ours. We do have higher intelligence above all animals, but the animal instincts still exists in us. Even when we have developed the sense that killing another is wrong, there are some who doesn’t understand our reason or doesn’t care why we should never kill another person.
Even though we have the laws, there is always going to be consequences to those who break it. We’re all social animals; we all see murders as wrong. To murder is to unlawfully take a life. To defend ourselves is justified because we want to live, not be murdered. We have the law that is supposed to protect us from those who seek to take our life and/or violate us.
Yes we have prisons to hold lawbreakers, but they are not perfect and neither are the trials and justice system. Even when we want to keep lawbreakers from hurting us, we empathically give them rights as they believe to be humane and fair. However, lawbreakers are lawbreakers, not little boys who didn’t realize what they did was wrong. If a murderer took lives, it is because they wanted to. Some seem to enjoy violating their victims, killing them. Why else do we have the death penalty? We get rid of that person, and then we saved many lives.
Why is it that coldblooded murderers won’t stop? Won’t even seek redemption for their crime? Because they took a life and meant it. They wanted to do it, it was no accident, no anger, no reason to take their lives, and they just do it as if victims were just little bugs. It’s as if we’re just bugs to them. They don’t see us as a person, but bugs they gleefully want to squish.
We can understand anger, but that was just beyond anger. We can understand that bosses can be unfair and cruel, wives or husbands are not good husbands or wives, we can understand people not respecting you, not even treating you as an equal, we can understand racism, we can understand the injustice. This is why we have laws, to make things justified. Our founding fathers didn’t lay the constitution as some part of a d├ęcor to the house, they made it so we can get justice we need.
The thing is, to say we shouldn’t kill a heinous criminal for killing innocent lives is to admit you have no pity for the victims, only you pity the murderers. You would feel sorry for pedophiles, rapists, cold blooded killers, and you ignore the victims they violated and/or killed.
Let’s say you have a cage full of bunnies, you love the bunnies, and you would protect and cherish them. There lies a wolf that sees your bunnies as nothing more than a tasty meal. Which one would you kill? If you pity murderers, you just killed the bunnies. If you value a human life, then the life that is to be valued is the innocents, not the murderers. To value murderers, pedophiles, and rapists is to think they should be allowed to kill people freely. If this is not what you view, then you should know victims are more important than murderers and pedophiles.
What is so important about a murderer or a pedophile who killed innocent people that we should spare them? It is important to know that they don’t care about us, they don’t even have a heart when a victim cries, and they don’t care about that the victim. Not ever. They will never care who it hurts and will continue doing so.


“Give them Life without parole, not the death penalty”

There was something that enrages me. Children kidnapped and found dead after being raped, young girls violated and raped and/or murdered, families killed, innocent people killed by psychopaths or serial killers and yet there are people who pities the killers. Why?! Do these abolitionists never realize how disgusting they are? These people killed innocent people and you are showing murderers sympathy and not the victims? Yet, these abolitionists are enraged that we’re prosecuting offenders and executing them for the crime they committed. They obviously don’t care about the victims, only the murderers and pedophiles and the rapists.
All of the anti-death penalty groups do not care for the suffering of innocent people because they look to murderers as if they were the victims and not the ones they’ve murdered and violated. If the anti-death penalty groups are smart, they would understand that we’re protecting the innocent bystanders, and not killing them because it was a thrill or anything like that to us.
In prison the murderers can do many things, escape from prison and reoffend, get wrongly released, accidently released, paroled, appeal, and most definitely, they will kill prison guards and inmates. So why is it exactly do we need murderers to be in prison?
If we are to imprison murderers, pedophiles, rapists rather than execute them, we might as well put them in a underground prison only for them. With more restrictions and less liberty and rights than the criminals of theft or burglary, and so on based on the crime they committed.

“The death penalty does not deter crimes.”

Oh well then let’s remove the prisons, police stations and the government because they too don’t have deterrent factors on criminals as well. What you’re talking about is pure anarchy, and no concern for the life of innocent children, young women, families, police officers, and just about everyone who wants to lead a life with less sufferings and no violent offenders to attack them.
The reason there cannot be a deterrent factor is because of profit, passion, or compulsiveness. Who cares if they did it because there’s money in their spouse’s life insurance or someone promises to pay you to assassinate someone (Profit)? Who cares if someone killed these people because of their mental problem (Passion)? Who cares if they killed them because of their religious belief or lack thereof, racial background, or whatever (Compulsive)? They took a life, no excuse. Death penalty cannot change their ways, neither does prison. So what’s next? Just let them go because there is no deterrence for heinous criminals? Let’s also note that criminals do however have fear for the law (Which is why they sweep their crime under the rug) if we eliminate the murderer, we stop the murders. The murder rates depends on the amount of executions in death penalty. The higher the execution, the murder rate goes down. Why? It is because the murderer is dead.
I can’t see criminals going, “Oh boy they are killing criminals, I want to die from lethal injections or in an electric chair too.” It is nuts and the idea of a criminal doing crime because they want to go to get a death sentence is farfetched. They did it because they want to. Did they feel bad about it?
As for the possibility of making more criminals, it has nothing to do with the death penalty itself, but rather the environment they’re in, the justice system in state’s or country’s jurisdiction, and the learning and influence of all those around them. If they want to commit a crime, then that was their decision, their choice of action, and that is their willingness to inflict harm to others intentionally and mercilessly. Our decision is to arrest them, decide their verdict, and ensure justice is fit for their crime.
Sometimes some can seek redemption and change their ways for the better, but not the hardened criminals. For the criminals worthy of death penalty, they should be extinguished so they can’t hurt another innocent person ever again. Heinous crime a criminal commits cannot deter because they don’t want to stop. Only way it stops is when they’re dead.

“The government is supposed to protect us, not murder us.”

“It is not the act of state killing, it involves psychological terror and torture. An act of human extermination.” This is said by some of the anti-death penalty group. They clearly think it’s ok to have heinous criminals kill innocent people but not ok for us to punish the criminal. Psychological terror? Where did they get that idea? There is no psychological terror; it is just a lethal injection for the criminal who deserves it. We’re not building some death camps. They are clearly calling us all a Nazi and claiming that the death penalty is a death camp thing. This is nuts. Human extermination? Where did they get that idea? We’re not exterminating anyone, we’re only executing the criminal who is worthy of being put to death. To call us a Nazi is disgusting and insulting and extremely untrue! Name one thing that points out that we’re creating psychological terror and human extermination. There are no death camps, the criminals are given fair hearing, not everyone is sentenced to death, just the ones in severe cases, we’re not mindlessly executing people, and we are eliminating a criminal who they themselves are the ones that actually cause psychological terror and human extermination. If you want to talk about the psychological terror and human extermination, take a good look at the concentration camps and at death penalty. See the difference? Death penalty, one criminal removed, concentration camps, millions of innocent people killed because they were different.
“The government is exterminating people, obliterating people.” Again, all wrong and untrue. We’re executing criminals, not innocent people. They are making things up. If we are exterminating people, then the by number of population in the states would be down to few hundreds. But clearly they made that up just so that they can have murderers go free to actually obliterate innocent people themselves.
“A death penalty takes away part of our humanity.” The death penalty doesn’t take anything away except the threat that seeks to do you and me harm. You want to know what takes away part of humanity? Murderers going free and killing us and violating us. We’re protecting innocent people, we’re only eliminating coldblooded killers and pedophiles.
“It is barbaric to kill.” Then don’t bother protecting yourself, don’t bother at all.
“The government is supposed to be protecting society but murdering isn’t one of them.” Just how thick can they get? The government is protecting the society. And they confused execution to murder. Murder is to unlawfully kill. If we eliminate a murderer then we saved a lot of lives. If we don’t, then it is the anti-death penalty groups that killed us all. If we can’t trust the government, then we can’t trust the police or prisons, or anything. The government is just a group of people whom also have human errors. Nothing is perfect. But those are not enough reasons to abolish the death penalty. If the abolitionists think that the government is not protecting society, then why hadn’t we seen less and less neighbors around? Why hadn’t we seen any news about people turning up dead by the government? The fact is the society is being protected and the death penalty is used in executing heinous criminals. To say the government is creating a new concentration camps and obliterating people, executing people is not only a lie but a paranoia without proof of evidence.

“You are descending to their level.”

As I said in earlier, the criminal commits a vile act, we punish the criminal for that crime. How is that lowering to their level? If a kid punches the bully, does that make him lower to his standards? No, it shows the bully he can’t be intimidated anymore. Just as we execute the criminal, he can’t kill anymore.
They say we’re leveling with them. You should know that the murderers, pedophiles, and rapists all committed a crime against innocent people, violating them, mutilating them, raping them, and torturing them, even other unimaginable things to them. And we, we arrest them, put them on trial, see that the death penalty is permissible, then prepare their execution and made it swift. Now where was it exactly did we “lowered ourselves to their level?”
I had watched Penn and Teller’s Episode on the death penalty where Penn has said, “It is not ok to kill a human being.” If only he would open his eyes to reality here, we’re executing them for a crime they committed. He understands this, but what he doesn’t understand was that as human beings goes, there has to be consequences for our actions, and we shouldn’t wavier it just because we’re all human beings. In fact, we shouldn’t kill an innocent human being. We shouldn’t and we don’t take pleasure in killing innocent people, only murderers do.
He and the anti-death penalty groups believes that being human should trump all reason to not kill a human for killing another human. We are not sacred cows, we are not all suppose to just stand up and go, “Oh I can’t kill my attacker because he too is a human.” Being human doesn’t excuse you for being punished for committing crimes. And any crime you commit, there will be punishment, minor or severe.
Life is precious, but not the murderers or pedophiles because they enjoy killing innocents like the children and they will willingly kill us for fun. So if Penn gets a chance to read this, he should understand that no one is excused from the consequences we have just because they happen to be human. The fact is, it’s our actions we choose that makes us for who we are, not that we are of the same species, as Martin Luther King has said, “Judge not by the color of our skin (Or in this case being of the same species) but by the content of our character.” We should judge for what we do, not what we look like on the outside.
Let’s run a little thought experiment here, let’s just say you have a country of your own. Everything you wanted is there. If you oppose the death penalty, then your country has no death penalty. Let’s say you have your murderers, pedophiles and rapists. What are you going to do? If you choose to put them in prison for life, then that may seem like a good idea but it isn’t. They appeal, they get a chance to be released if they fight hard enough and have the right attorney on their side. Or they escape from prison, or possibly they murder the inmates and prison guards. Let’s start with your escaped criminals. You start finding dead bodies around. And as for the released, you find even more dead bodies. What could have been done to make the country safe? Medical treatment? There are no studies that show they make any true recovery from their mental state and their sadistic “urges” to kill. They kill because they wanted to. Your hands are tied with problems, the criminals laid waste to many innocent civilians, millions of taxpayer’s money is wasted to clean up the mess they made. If you choose to put them back in prison, they’ll just escape again, or get appeals. So you kept the criminals locked up, they’ll never stop. But the problem doesn’t end there, the laws change, new people takes the positions, things are changing. They wrongly released them again. It weighs heavily on your shoulders.
Let’s say not only do we not kill heinous criminals, but we give them all the rights and privileges regardless of the actions of their crime all because they too are human beings and it is inhumane to take away their rights. They could get a chance to get freed from prison and reoffend again. Can you truly stop them? No you can’t because you just released a heinous criminal out in the streets. Now that heinous criminal is free to kill and your citizens are now sacrificed. If you think keeping them in prison for life is cheaper and better, you’re wrong. People can forget the crimes a heinous criminal had committed and wrongly released them. So the next time you tell me we’re killing human who committed heinous crimes, you are suggesting that we kill the innocents instead.
Picture this scenery in your head; you’re out in a lot, you and a person in front of you. Third person runs up and kills the person. You back away going, “Oh he killed an innocent person, but we shouldn’t kill him, because I would be no better than him.” Then he kills the next person, and the next person all because you “Don’t want to sink to their level.” Now is this the kind of scenery you want? Because that is precisely what you’re implying.
Now you might go, “No, no, no, I mean we just put them in prison.”
Ok, back to the scenery, you get that person arrested. He gets 25 years for murder, then a parole, he wanders around the street. Sneaking behind the parole officer’s back, he kills again. Guess what? You just murdered innocent people all because you don’t want to “Sink to their levels.” Stop acting so high and mighty. And besides, we’re not trying to be self righteous here, which we shouldn’t, we’re trying to stop the criminals.

“Criminals are people too with families and friends,
They had suffered,
What about the criminal with mental condition?”

Are we supposed to just let them go because they have a life? “So you took a life of a child but that’s ok with me, you go have a life you didn’t deserve.” Just because they have a life doesn’t excuse for what they did. You rob an innocent life for profit, for compulsiveness, or for passion, you forfeited yours.
Yes even the criminals have suffered which proves that everything is not all black and white. But just because you suffered, doesn’t grant you a permission to harm another innocent person, regardless of their past or mental condition. Everyone suffers; everyone has bad things happen to them in the past. Should that be really an issue to whether or not we execute a heinous criminal? They suffered, we suffered, but they make us suffer even more by hurting us or those we love, and/or taking a life.
If a person with mental condition is killing innocent people and doesn’t know what they are doing, shouldn’t be any different than the person who knows what they are doing. They still committed a heinous crime all the same. We cannot waive the punishment just because the person with mental problems doesn’t realize what they have done. They are still a danger to this society. To pity them because of their mental state is to ignore the fact that they had killed an innocent person.
Let me also clarify something here, I’m not saying all with mental conditions are bad, just the ones that committed a serious felony. If I ask what the person with mental disorder does and they say, “Oh he talks to imaginary friends and urinates in public.” Ok, keep him in the hospital. If the person has mental problem and he kidnaps children and mutilates them or rapes them, then point out one good reason he or she shouldn’t be punished.

“It is not constitutional. It’s cruel and inhumane”

Wrong, it is constitutional as it stated in the constitution, though indirectly. As for the cruelty, it is not. What is cruel was a murderer who kills innocent people. There is nothing unusual because everything is common because people killed everyday in self defense, execution, in war, or in coldblooded murder.
There is some who said that the lethal injections are used by Nazis. Now the thing is, we’re not doing this like a Nazi; we’re not killing out of hate. We used lethal injections because we believe it is painless and quick clean death.
Believe this as I tell you, Nazis also breathes air, eats food, sleeps in houses, also converses with others and has families. Should we get rid of that too? They made cars so let’s get rid of cars, they also made hospitals so let’s get rid of that too. We shouldn’t have to get rid of everything just because it was used by others that had done heinous things.
To support the death penalty, you care about innocent people because you believe there is no reason for murderers to go unpunished and the victims to be left ignored. To oppose the death penalty, you turn a blind eye against the victims and look compassionately to the murderers. I believe life is precious and to take such a life forfeits you the right to have a life. That is justification for the victims.
The person who violates human rights is nothing more than an enemy to us all. It is just to eliminate that violate offender otherwise he or she will kill more. It is us civilians or them that should be gone, we chose the heinous criminals, and abolitionists choose us.
To abolish the death penalty, you have given the power to criminals to have advantage over their victims. You leave the nation unguarded. This is weak and blind. Not to mention a violation to a human right, a person should have protection under law against criminal activities.
Overall, We’re not all murderers because to murder is to unlawfully kill, death penalty is a lawful act. The deterrence in the death penalty is plausible because criminals fear death and the abolitionist confuses the cause and effect on the crime rates and the death penalty. The higher crime rates are not because of the death penalty but because of bad influences in the environment and that sort of thing, criminals are everywhere. The death penalty has nothing to do with the rates of crime in the states or countries, but is a solution to the elimination of heinous criminals because you cannot kill if you’re already dead. There are now less and less innocents on death row. If we did take a life of an innocent, it is human error of ours. To abolish the death penalty because of the risks is to abolish hospitals, prisons, courts, cars, guns, drugs, everything.

“What about the morality?”

It is important to understand that morality isn’t set in stone, it comes from what we believe to be moral or isn’t. Morality is complicated, not simple. We can say, we shouldn’t kill an innocent human being, which we can agree with. To say we shouldn’t kill a human being implies we shouldn’t go to war, we shouldn’t protect ourselves or others. But that is not the worst part, the fact is, we have our murderers, pedophiles, and rapists violating human rights and murdering innocent people. We can all agree their actions are immoral without doubt. To say we shouldn’t execute them humanely because they look like us isn’t the principle of morality, but a confused concept of what makes us for who we are. Our feelings, goals, beliefs, our actions, dreams, our dislikes and likes makes us for what we are, not for being of the same species.
If it is immoral to remove the life of a murderer, then should it mean it’s immoral to imprison criminals because we took away their liberty? Choices that we all make, bad ones and good ones, there is always a cause and effect for the choices we make. There are always consequences for our actions and sometimes we must strip their rights to liberty for breaking laws, strip the right to live for taking a life, there is always consequences.
Everybody has different ideas to what is moral because of experience in their life, things they were taught, and the religious belief they were brought up.
Let’s do another thought experiment, let’s say you have a teenage daughter. A serial rapist breaks in through her bedroom window, he rapes and tortures and kills her. Was there any reason he did that? Does this look like a cause where a fox slaughters the hen house? We know this was wrong, so did the serial rapist. But the serial rapist did it anyway. Is there any reason to keep him alive at all? What would be the well deserving consequences for people like him? Death is the proper consequence for his crime. Everything is has consequences. To say it is immoral to kill this serial rapist is to think his murder for the young girl is not important. To say he shouldn’t die for his crime because of moral integrity conflicts with the importance of his murder of an innocent victim, especially for no apparent reason. He did this because he likes to. He thinks this is a game to him, he thinks he can do as he like to anybody he rapes and murder. To tell me that I can’t have him executed implies his crime isn’t worth the death penalty because of your pity for the rapist.

“Religious view on the death penalty.”

First off, religion shouldn’t have a part in the whole death penalty debate; second, the morality of Christianity is skewered by the contradictions and poor judgments on what is moral.
To say that anything the God says is wrong, we should take God’s word for it. It is ridiculous because the God’s word of morality is thou shall not kill and you should put to death of Homosexuals, witches, atheists, adulterers, disobedient children, so on and so forth. Like I said, the idea of Christian’s view of morality is vague and crude, not to mention insane and ludicrous.
If Christians wants to argue that Jesus has done away the old testaments and said we should not kill, it is important to know he did no such thing. This is because he clearly stated that he did not come to abolish the Old Testament, but to fulfill it and he did by making the already ludicrous Old Testament laws even more severe.
I’m an atheist and I do not believe that the doctrine of Christianity makes good compelling argument against or for the death penalty at all.

My list of reasons to support the death penalty

The expenses on the death penalty, life sentence and so on are all to a court, trials, the appeals, and the jury, so to say the death penalty is more expensive is not really true, the courts itself is expensive. The point is, the sentences itself are rather inexpensive.

The cruel and inhumane killings are done by murderers, not by lawful execution. We’re eliminating those who would seek to do harm.

Criminals are not some holy cows and we are not some Hindus following the doctrine of Hinduism.

Being a human being is not an exception to execution just because they happen to look like a human, but because of the crime they committed. It’s all about the content of our character, our feelings, dreams, beliefs, opinions, likes and dislikes makes us for who we are no matter the appearance.

To say that the government is exterminating people, obliterating people, producing psychological terror, making mass human extermination is all heavily and extremely false. This sort of argument fails because there are no evidence to prove that the government has done so much as created death camps.

The idea that murderers who kills for profit, passion, or compulsive reasons is not good reason to execute just because of deterrence, then putting them in prison would be bad idea because they too don’t have any deterrent factors. Executing murderers for deterrent reason may not stop others from committing the similar heinous crime, but it stops that specific murderer from killing again. To say that heinous criminals doesn’t care and will kill anyway is precisely why they should be executed.

To say the moral principle is to not murder people is correct, but execution is not an unlawful act, but a punishment by law.

To say we should just keep murderers and pedophiles in prison for life because it is more humane than killing, we just already killed innocent people. They can appeal, escape from prison, be released by the government, by wrongly released, or accidently released, they may even kill inmates and prison guards.

To want to abolish the death penalty because the devices are inhumane is understandable though I don’t care about the heinous criminals in the slightest bit way, there is however better ways to execute a heinous criminal “humanely” such as the guillotine or electromagnetic pulse or the lethal injections. This is so we can go, “Oh we’re going to execute you, but we’re going to do it kindly.” We’re not putting down a dying dog; we’re putting down heinous criminals.

To abolish the death penalty because we have innocent people on death row is to abolish prisons and courts because innocents too can be convicted wrongly and put in prison. We should also abolish police stations because the police officers too apprehend innocent people they thought were suspects by mistakes or possibly out of hate.

To say it is cruel and inhumane to execute murderers is to blindly ignore the murderer’s previous victims and portray murderers as if they are victims instead. Showing compassion for murderers means you do not care about the innocents, just the murderers. Lastly, the heinous criminals do not care about who they hurt, they enjoyed it, and are willing to hurt people.

Statistically, the studies show that the numbers of executions of murderers reduced the murder rates. I know this is true because a dead murderer cannot kill again. The reason of higher crime rates in the states is not because of the death penalty, but vice versa. What makes criminals a criminal? Bad influence, being raised by bad parents, the environment they’re in. Criminals don’t go, “I want to kill so I can die on lethal injections.”

The purpose of executing heinous criminals is to save innocent lives, to protect the society. The lifetime in prison isn’t the better alternative as I just stated earlier.

To say that the death penalty is a violation to human rights is incorrect because the death penalty executes the human rights violators. Also to think that the death penalty takes away part of humanity is also incorrect because that implies we’re just killing people for fun.

To say executing a murderer makes us all murderers, then what does that say about murderers who kills the innocent people? Wouldn’t that imply they made you all into murderers? How about the soldiers in Iraq? Or the woman who defended herself against her attacker? Or the police officer for defending the school bus full of children from a crazed psychopath taking them hostages?

To say we are sinking to their level is farfetched because a murderer murders innocent victims because they like to, they enjoyed it. We’re executing them so they can’t kill anymore. Where exactly did we lower ourselves to their level?

To abolish the death penalty because you don’t want to risk innocent people on death row would mean we have to eliminate prisons, courthouses, police stations, hospitals, cars, airplanes, weapons, and anything else that can hurt us simply because you don’t want to take risks.

To say that the lethal injections are used by the Nazi doesn’t mean we are doing this as a Nazi. In fact, if we had to not use it because Nazis used it, then we might just have to get rid of cars they made, hospitals they built, because a lot of things we have is made by the Germans. Also Nazis eats, breathes and sleeps. Should we not do that then? Maybe the police officers and the good law abiding citizens shouldn’t have guns because criminals have guns too.