Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘death penalty’

Ron Paul, member of the United States House of...

Bob Kincaid, “America’s only born and bred Southern liberal talk show host,” said the following on his December 29, 2011 Head On broadcast (starting at 46:48):

Just to go back to crazy old Ron Paul for a minute, Jim. I saw a story earlier today where — now they’ve scrubbed it from the Ron Paul website — but he was very proud to receive the endorsement of a fundamentalist preacher, who wants to, um, there’s no other way to say it, who wants to bring in capital punishment for anyone found to be gay. Ron Paul got his endorsement. That thinking is out there. And he says, well you know, it’ll take us a while to do it, but I believe we can; Gotta start somewhere.

Ron Paul has said since the 2008 campaign, he no longer supports the death penalty in federal cases, so that preacher wasted his endorsement if he expects a supporter in the White House.

If the preacher expects Ron Paul to extend the federal government into state issues, he needs to read my articleDr. Stan Monteith explains the limited role of the federal government that few Christian evangelicals seem to get.

As for the constitutionality of the death penalty, see my article, The death penalty is explicitly constitutional in the United States. Whether the death penalty is a potential penalty for certain federal crimes is separate from whether they will be sought in particular cases, and whether Ron Paul will use the constitutional authority of the President to grant clemency in such cases.

For more on Ron Paul, see my articles:
1) FreedomWorks front-man says he thinks Ron Paul’s role isn’t to win the 2012 presidential race
2) Ron Paul right on health care: it’s not a right and it’s not a privilege. It’s a good.
3) Will Ron Paul throw 9/11 Truth under the bus again, like he did in 2008?

Read Full Post »

Two hangman's nooses and gallows behind the co...

Some have argued that the death penalty is unconstitutional, including the Supreme Court itself in the case of Furman v. George (1972), citing the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishments in the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which states:

Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

While I would agree that a specific application of the death penalty is unconstitutional if it violates the constitutional provisions of criminal justice, another amendment to the Constitution clearly shows the death penalty is a constitutional form of punishment for certain crimes.

The relevant sections of the Fifth Amendment are:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury,

and:

nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb;

and:

nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;

Since all 10 amendments to the U.S. Constitution, which constitute the Bill of Rights, were ratified on the same day of December 15, 1791, it is therefore clear that their provisions should be considered as a whole.

The fact that the Fifth Amendment mentions “capital crime,” “jeopardy of life,” and “deprived of life” as valid under certain circumstances shows that the death penalty is a constitutional form of punishment for certain crimes.

Read Full Post »