I can believe this, and at the same time still believe there are a lot of racists taunts going on. I think in these cases people are just using racial slurs because they believe it’s the most hateful thing they can say, not so much because they believe in white supremacy. Honestly, if fans thought making fun of…

Sure. That’s the point of charity. You decide where you think help is needed and you make a personal sacrifice to see that help is given. That way, the government can never stop its funding.

It’s very easy to be charitable with someone else’s money.

It’s a nice idea, but why stop there? Instead of using other people’s money(i.e. taxes) to form a special monetary account, why don’t you and the rest of your community do it yourselves? That way, the federal government can never de-fund it in the future.

But you equated the issue as an absolute choice between adoption with the homosexual couple and foster care as the only alternative. That’s disingenuous. And your example isn’t realistic because it assumes the child wouldn’t be a match to anyone else.

That’s not what they’re saying. You’ve misrepresented their position. That could be a clue as to why you’re having difficulty understanding people on the other side. If you make an honest attempt to see their perspective, you’ll have more success.

Sure. I mean, what’s more likely: that 100% of a State’s House of representatives are horrible people, or that you just can’t understand how anyone can rationally hold a different opinion from you?

I believe the strict definition is: any state with a member of the SEC is considered a southern state.

Mark Hamill is beautiful. He had a point (like Shatner and Adam West) where his most beloved role kinda killed his career, and I’m sure he was bitter about it. But he accepted his fate and used that to become an icon. Bravo, Mark Hamill.

Yes. You “tricked” me into admitting we live in a free society that can write any laws it wants, and that in your extremely ridiculous scenario blasphemy could be made a capital offense. Let me know if you care to lurch back into a realistic discussion.

Then here’s my answer: Yes. If you can show me a current state law where blasphemy is punishable by death, and that the law has withstood judicial and Constitutional challenge, and that the majority of citizens are in favor of. Sure. I’m all for that.

We’re talking about Arkansas and the US in general.

Straw Man argument.

We should choose the death penalty if we feel the crime deserves the ultimate punishment. We certainly have the option to be merciful, but we aren’t compelled to be merciful. Juries and judges are tasked with exactly that question (how should the death penalty be measured out). But the state legislatures we elect…

You’re making a fallacy by assuming I’m saying others are unjust. I am saying the death penalty is a just penalty for extreme crimes. The crimes of the two men recently executed are good examples of extremely heinous crimes. What they did forfeited their right to continue living.

It’s a just punishment for extremely heinous crimes.

I live in a world where it’s best to fix what’s broken, not what isn’t. If you’re worried about inaccurate convictions, fine. I also dislike inaccurate convictions. But that should be fixed without doing away with the dealth penalty.

Is this headline missing some words? It doesn’t seem to make sense.

That’s a judicial issue, not a capital punishment issue. No one is in favor of wrongly convicting an innocent person.

Fixed it.