Politics Top Three Reasons???

Existentialist said:
[quote name='Vaughn's girl_1' date='Apr 6 2004, 01:21 AM'] I don't like Kerry, he's against the death penalty.
See, but I'm against the death penalty too.

Bush wants to ruin Alaska by digging it up for oil. :mellow: That's so very not cool. [/quote]
It wouldn't "ruin" alaska. :mellow:
 
[quote name='Vaughn's girl_1' date='Apr 6 2004, 01:21 AM']I don't like Kerry, he's against the death penalty.[/quote]
huh? :confused:

The death penalty kills a lot of innocent people as well as people who are mentally ill (handicapped). If you think killing the innocent and handicapped is o.k than you're just sick :blink:

Back on topic: I don't think that Kerry is completely innocent and 'pure', but he's a heck of a lot better than Bush.
Bush gets his daddy to weasel him put of his problems. i.e. Vietnam. At least Kerry was man enough to go and than speak out against the war after he experienced it. Where as Bush has never experienced war but thinks he has the right to know when it is appropriate to start one?! ;)


~~Spongy!
 
SpongeBobSquarePants said:
The death penalty kills a lot of innocent people as well as people who are mentally ill (handicapped). If you think killing the innocent and handicapped than you're just sick :blink:
It dosent kill "a lot" if you mean what you think i mean. Even so...it saves people becasue if not executed, some of those condemed people would have gotten back out on the streets and killed more innocent people.
 
71 peopel were executed in 2002 in the US, 1 is too many.

If persons weren't so full of petty drug users then the system would be able to handle the amount of people sentenced to life in prison, rather then having them on death row waiting for their appeals to run out.

I think it is far worse to have to live out the rest of your life in misery behind bars then to be killed. I think I life of misery for some convicted murders is much better then the cowards way out.
 
SpongeBobSquarePants said:
AliasHombre said:
Existentialist said:
Vaughn said:
What a wise-a*s comment that is :rolleyes:

The oild drilling in Alaska would damage (maybe even destroy) the natural habitat. It's not like cutting down a tree and just replanting a seed in its place, the damage that the drilling would cause would just ruin everything. Maybe forever. :blink:

~~Spongy!
It would not be as harmfu as the enviromentalist bomb throwers would make you think.
 
AliasHombre said:
SpongeBobSquarePants said:
AliasHombre said:
Existentialist said:
Vaughn said:
What a wise-a*s comment that is :rolleyes:

The oild drilling in Alaska would damage (maybe even destroy) the natural habitat. It's not like cutting down a tree and just replanting a seed in its place, the damage that the drilling would cause would just ruin everything. Maybe forever. :blink:

~~Spongy!
It would not be as harmfu as the enviromentalist bomb throwers would make you think.
There has long been a controversy between environmentalists and oil companies over whether to allow oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, commonly referred to as ANWR. To put the size of the ANWR in perspective, keep in mind that Alaska contains 591,000 square miles, or about 378,000,000 acres. The ANWR is five percent of Alaska or 19 million acres. Of these acres, eight percent have been proposed for development, and only one percent would be affected by oil production.

This means that about 15,000 acres, or .004 percent of Alaska, would be affected. Actual production facilities including roads, drilling pads, living quarters, and pipelines would cover a thousand acres.
 
Yes and I am sure that no land around the site while be destroyed will the drilling takes place. Moving in equipment and creating living space for the workers is sure to have no effect at all on the surrounding area. I need not also mention pollution often doesn't stay where it is intended to.

I think the point is why have wild life preserves if they are not going to be preserved.
 
When the 800-mile trans-Alaskan pipeline was built, temporary access roads were required for construction and maintenance. A breakthrough in road technology has eliminated the need for these gravel roads that leave an impact on the environment. Ocean water is pumped onto the tundra where it freezes to form an ice road from which maintenance can be done during the winter. In the summer these roads melt and leave no trace. Vehicles with huge rubber tires use the roads. Ice roads are also used for oil exploration.
 
AliasHombre said:
SpongeBobSquarePants said:
The death penalty kills a lot of innocent people as well as people who are mentally ill (handicapped). If you think killing the innocent and handicapped than you're just sick  :blink:
It dosent kill "a lot" if you mean what you think i mean. Even so...it saves people becasue if not executed, some of those condemed people would have gotten back out on the streets and killed more innocent people.
Criminals don't have to be let out onto the streets. That's what jails are for.


I'm against the death penalty as well. I think the convicted criminal should have a choice....do I want to be executed or live my entire life in jail.
 
SecretAgentMan said:
AliasHombre said:
SpongeBobSquarePants said:
The death penalty kills a lot of innocent people as well as people who are mentally ill (handicapped). If you think killing the innocent and handicapped than you're just sick  :blink:
It dosent kill "a lot" if you mean what you think i mean. Even so...it saves people becasue if not executed, some of those condemed people would have gotten back out on the streets and killed more innocent people.
Criminals don't have to be let out onto the streets. That's what jails are for.


I'm against the death penalty as well. I think the convicted criminal should have a choice....do I want to be executed or live my entire life in jail.
I don't think a convicted criminal should have a choice. Stop making prisons so nice and let the jerks live their lives in dungeons. Maybe when they're 78, rotting away in prison, they'll grow a conscious and start caring.

Plus, there's that whole thing where too many innocent people are being put to death. And it's expensive to execute someone.

This means that about 15,000 acres, or .004 percent of Alaska, would be affected. Actual production facilities including roads, drilling pads, living quarters, and pipelines would cover a thousand acres.

Yeah, drilling for oil, even on .004% of the land, will hurt it. On that .004%, can you imagine what lives there? Drilling isn't a quiet business either. It's not like they're building a cabin in the woods. It causes pollution ('cause there's not enough of that already in the world) and it will force animals away from homes where they've been dwelling for years. It's like with the rainforests (though on a smaller scale, of course)... "oh, cutting down these trees won't do anything to the rainforest." Right. I bet we killed a cure for cancer when we destroyed the rainforest.

You're talking to a gal who's thinking of getting a job with Greenpeace this summer. ;)
 
Back
Top