I just realized something, almost like an epiphany. Red states like to kill people.

Such a click-bait title. Tsk.

How about we resort to actual facts.

This link has a graphic of the U.S. showing which states have the desth penalty:

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/state-and-federal-info/state-by-state

This one (linked to the other, but I'll save y'all the trouble) shows how many executions have taken place for each state. You can set parameters to only look at specific years and/or specific states.

https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/executions/executions-overview

Geebus, Texas ... 570? Seriously?

 

They practically have an assembly line for executions in TX!

 

Prove their guilt. Who conceives them?

 

True enough about California. However, California, Oregon, and Pennsylvania, death penalty states all, are currently under a gubernatorial moratoria, thus leaving the red states the only ones killing their citizens. Mostly red states.

 

Yeah they fast track them in Texas. Heck, they even have an express lane for those they consider the worst.

 

A human is someone who is born. For most of human history, humans have been plagued by high infant mortality rates. It is for this reason why humans produced large families because the odds are that half of them wouldn't make it into adulthood. Many cultures from around the world wouldn't even name their offspring until it survived for several months or a year. Most religious rituals for children are a testament to surviving childhood, but now in modern times we want to define a human as a glob of replicating cells? I don't think so.

Societies set markers for humans to reach certain milestones that dictate to the rest of the members of that society that this child is now capable of making decisions as an adult, and until those milestones are met, they aren't considered a full member of society. A fetus does not qualify in any traditional sense to warrant that designation because it cannot even survive outside of the womb.

 

Things change. Today there are jurisdictions where if you kill a pregnant woman, depending on how far along they are, and that varies, you can be charged with two murders.

 

True, but that has to do with the context. A pregnant woman, especially one who is showing, is presumed to want her baby. A murderer not only deprives the mother of life but the potential for life that she carries, along with the loss and grief of her husband and family.

 

Hmm. Chicago has how many gun deaths this year? Baltimore? Detroit? Los Angeles? Oakland? Tx executed less than 10 people last year. Again, this is likely a more than 99% ratio vs number of executions by states. That's the math.

 

Actually, Illinois has fewer deaths per 100K than Texas. Also, the Texas poverty rate is 14.9% as opposed to Illinois at 12.1%.

Dangerous states: Which states have the highest rates of violent crime and most murders?

 

and i wonder what the stats are in blue states for killing the unborn.. I'm guessing we don't come close.. tho' we all have our blue areas

 

There are times when all you can do whenever you hear something really stupid (like deprogramming supporters of the opposition) that you have to show through humor just how stupid it is. It’s not done out of hate or partisanship but rather from recognizing extremists when you see them. It’s not really difficult to see examples of stupidity on either side of the political aisle.

 

~ Sort of like "gallows humor" ..

 

There are 28 states that still have the death penalty. Yes, most of them are red states. But not all. California for instance still has the death penalty. They tried to get rid of the DP in 2016 with prop 62 but failed with only 46% of the vote.

As for abortion...not really sure how you can consider that as being for wanting to kill people. They are trying to stop the killing of the unborn. Even you call them "right to life". Of course you go on to say that once the baby is born the states want nothing to do with the baby. But that is a false assertion. The same states are real big on making sure that child support is paid. So much so that its not uncommon for the father to loose everything that they have worked for in order to pay the high amount of child support that those states require. (I say father because most of the time the mother gets custody of the child). Those states also support adoption agencies and have grant programs for them and for prospective parents. Foster parents who take care of unwanted children until they are adopted get monthly stipends on a per child basis that is tax free in most areas that I know of, I'd say all but not sure on that count.

The reason that most red states, or Republicans, are viewed as being not caring of children once they are born is due to propaganda mostly. In part because the stance of Republicans on welfare is that they are against it. But they're not actually against it. They support local charities for instance. Additionally most aren't so much against welfare programs as they are against the excessive waste of it. Or to put it more clearly, they are against people being able to use it even though they can work and provide for themselves but don't because being on welfare is easier.

As for covid, that had nothing to do with life or death to many conservatives. It had more to do with what they believed as government overreach. Something that conservatives are highly against. And yes, that includes up to the point of dying to preserve liberty and freedom. It also did not help that Fauci, for months advised against using masks. Even admits that he doesn't regret lying about it. So, conservatives, already prone to not trusting the government has a government worker admitting to lying to them...how else would you expect them to react? That distrust is just going to widen. Additionally conservatives recognized the danger in shutting things down the way leftists wanted. There are many other factors also. Also I wouldn't be trying to use the "anti-science" trope. Liberals have their own issues with listening to science when it comes to social issues.

 

Umm...yeah...I wouldn't go there if I were you. Leftists think guns are the cause of death and crime and won't examine the social underpinnings of crime for that reason.

 

Perfect example of someone who is not "red" ignoring science.

 

If science had answered this question, there wouldn't be a debate.

Technically, yes, inception is how most of us began our journey into this life, but when does one actually become "human" not in a scientific categorical sense, but as a recognized member of a social group.

 

So, you admit to ignoring science because society is more important to you on this particular subject than science. This is shown by you admitting that "technically, yes, inception is how..." and then saying "...not in a scientific sense, but as a recognized member of a social group".

How is that any different than conservatives ignoring science on Covid in favor of a societal concept?

The point is that both sides have certain things that is more important to them than science, and both sides have parts where science is more important. Neither side is actually anti-science. Any condemnation of one side by the other of being "anti-science" is just ignorance at best.

 

This is NOT a question that can be answered by science, at least not yet, but as I've mentioned before, there may come a time within as little as ten years a solution that will probably freak all of us out. And this whole debate will then be silly.



And your Covid analogy doesn't even come close.

 

republicans are not pro-life.... they are anti-choice

 

exactly, even most republicans agree with this

just like one can die before their body does, a body can be alive before one enters it

our bodies are just a vessel for our life force

http://www.slate.com/id/2120872/
"a member of President Bush's Council on Bioethics, describes in his book The Ethical Brain, current neurology suggests that a fetus doesn't possess enough neural structure to harbor consciousness until about 26 weeks, when it first seems to react to pain. Before that, the fetal neural structure is about as sophisticated as that of a sea slug and its EEG as flat and unorganized as that of someone brain-dead."

 

A totally uninformed, ignorant blather.

 

Exactly! Remember the Terry Schiavo case that Jeb Bush championed for? The woman was brain dead, but the holy rollers insisted there was still life. Once she finally died, the autopsy confirmed she had been brain dead for years.

It's like you said, they're not pro-life, they are anti-choice because if they were pro-life, they would bend over backward for legislation that helps children. They do the exact opposite. For a party that is supported by so many Evangelicals, you would think they wouldn't hold such a Darwinian view of society.

 

Your question is a philosophical one. Science has already determined that human life starts at inception. That is a fact. Scientific fact. One you admitted to when you said "Technically, yes, inception is how most of us began our journey into this life" When to determine it as human enough to be a recognized member of a social group is just a philosophical question. One that science cannot ever answer. So yes, my "covid analogy" is spot on. You attempting to say otherwise is just you refusing to acknowledge the science in favor of societal issues. Furthering my point.

You also further my point by pointing to Dolly. (the cloned sheep). By doing so you insinuate that if we ever became technologically advanced enough to grow humans outside of a female body then when a ZEF becomes human enough to be a part of a social group would change.

 

I remember that case, boy was it a shock when after that Robert decided to turn off the life-support system for his own mother and was angry at God for making him have to decide, talk about irony

"Playing God"

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/nov/04/usa.health

"But, given the vehemence with which he has been fighting to prolong Terri's life, it is a little surprising to learn that Robert decided to turn off the life-support system for his mother."

"Robert says. "I was very angry with God because I didn't want to make those decisions.""