Death penalty for voter fraud

Removable Mind said:

If voter fraud becomes a capital crime...then I think that the next time my neighbor's kid chases after a runaway football into my yard, I get to use deadly force on the little booger machine.

Click to expand...

Federalist said:

I see. So in your opinion there was an implication. Well, I can't control what you infer from what others write.

However, the fact remains that the OP made no statement regarding the frequency of voter fraud. If you disagree, please provide the quote of the OP.

Click to expand...

yobarnacle said:

Simply searching "guilty of vote fraud found dozens of links pages like this first one.

Democrat Mayor’s Campaign Worker Guilty of Voter Fraud ...
... mayor’s re-election campaign in 2011 has agreed to plea guilty to three counts of vote fraud in Jennings County Circuit Court on ...
specfriggintacular.wordpress.com/2013/05/30/democrat... - Cached

Democrat Legislator Guilty of Felony Voter Fraud – Reduced ...
UnPoliticallyCorrect! (by UnPoliticallyCorrect) ... January 2, 2013 **The real travesty here is that this “pillar of society” will be permitted to run ...
specfriggintacular.wordpress.com/2013/05/30/democrat... - Cached

Ex-lawmaker pleads guilty to vote fraud - WLFI.com ...
VERNON, Ind. (AP) - A southern Indiana judge sentenced a former state representative to 18 months after the defendant pleaded guilty to three counts of vote fraud ...
Page Not Found - Debate Politics Forums - Cached

Hamilton County poll worker found guilty of voter fraud
A Hamilton County poll worker accused of voter fraud was found guilty for illegal voting in ... Mailing in a ballot registering to vote at a precinct after you've ...
www.wcpo.com/dpp/news/local_news/hamilton-county-poll... - Cached

Guilty Of Voter Fraud - Video Results
ACORN GUILTY OF VOTER FRAUD!!!!.Play VideoACORN GUILTY OF VOTER FRAUD!!!!Indiana Secretary of State found guilty of voter fraud.Play VideoIndiana Secretary of State found guilty of voter fraudU.S. Guilty of Voter Fraud.Play VideoU.S. Guilty of Voter FraudElection official guilty of voter fraud.Play VideoElection official guilty of voter fraudGuilty Of Voter Fraud.Play VideoGuilty Of Voter FraudElection official guilty of voter fraud.Play VideoElection official guilty of voter fraudMore Guilty Of Voter Fraud videos »
Ex-Ind. lawmaker pleads guilty to vote fraud | www ...
A former state representative and Democratic campaign consultant from southern Indiana was sentenced to nine months in jail and nine months' probation Wednesday after ...
Page Not Found - Debate Politics Forums - Cached

Poll worker convicted of voting fraud | Cincinnati.com ...
Nun pleads guilty to voter fraud; escapes prison; Hamilton County Board of Elections widens probe; Nun resigns after vote fraud accusation;
news.cincinnati.com/.../Poll-worker-convicted-voting-fraud - Cached

Obama Supporter Found Guilty Of Multiple Counts Of Voter ...
Melowese Richardson has already admitted that she committed voter fraud to help Barack Obama get elected. “Yes, I voted twice,” Richardson told WCPO-TV.
Obama Supporter Found Guilty Of Multiple Counts Of Voter Fraud In Ohio | Right Wing News... - Cached

Barnum woman guilty of voter fraud | Duluth News Tribune ...
Published May 11, 2013, 09:21 AM Barnum woman guilty of voter fraud Shawn Marie Kaarbo of Barnum pleaded guilty in Carlton County Court last Wednesday to one count ...
www.duluthnewstribune.com/event/article/id/266840 - Cached

Voter Fraud Is a Proven Election Manipulation Tactic | Debate ...
Probably not, since the Lincoln County auditor was also found guilty of voter fraud in 2005. [See photos of Wisconsin Voters Heading to the Polls]
Is Voter Fraud a Real Problem? | Debate Club | US News Opinion... - Cached

Missouri lawmaker’s uncle pleads guilty in KC vote fraud ...
In August 2010, Missouri House candidate John Joseph Rizzo defeated his Democratic primary opponent, Will Royster, by a single vote. On Monday, Rizzo’s uncle John ...
www.kansascity.com/2013/05/13/4233705/missouri-lawmakers... - Cached

Click to expand...

HumanBeing said:

Uh, what? I've never in my life heard anyone claim that "Christianity begins at the new testament". Jesus orders Christians to follow the Law of Moses in the Old Testament: "Do not think that I [Jesus] have come to abolish the Law". It's very explicit about the whole thing. Jews believe in the old testament, Christians believe in the original and the sequel. I honestly never even thought for a moment that I'd ever end up debating that, it's simple well documented fact.

Click to expand...

Nope, they frequently do it through brutal violence and occasionally murder.

Click to expand...

It's an attempt at being a traitor. You're simply giving an example where voter fraud is unsuccessful in its end goal.

You people confuse the hell out of me. I despise representitive democracy with every fiber of my being, it is the root of all modern political oppression, so why does it seem like I'm the only one who thinks a government who comes to power through fraud is even worse than a democratically elected government? How come you scream about how great democracy is, but when people try to pervert it to seize power, you talk about it like it's some victimless crime?

You need to get some consistency in your arguments. This whole thing is weak.

Click to expand...

haymarket said:

Actually, the writer does indeed clearly control that. That is why they equated the harsh penalty for a capital crime with the relative minor league offense of individual voter fraud.

Click to expand...

haymarket said:

Didn't Clint Eastwood do that in a movie a few years ago?

Click to expand...

Rainman05 said:

What Jesus more specifically said was something along the lines: I didn't come to undo my father's work. Meaning, he didn't come to revert the Original sin. When humans are born, we are born with the Original sin.. and through baptism we get rid of it. His preachings however were quite different and lead to a new religion. if he had just preached the same old same old, it would have been more on the lines of:
-You, you and you, **** off or else I'm going to drown you all or throw pestilence and ruin your cities. Now piss off will ya?

Click to expand...

Rainman05 said:

Also, I've been nothing but consistent in my arguments. I just don't know how else to talk to you to get the message across. It's not a complicated message.

Click to expand...

HumanBeing said:

The old testament is supposedly the word of God, and the new testament is supposedly the word of Jesus. You can't claim to be a Christian by believing in one but not the other, it just doesn't make any sense at all.




Trying to change the outcome of a democratic election through fraudulent means to seize power isn't an attempt at treachery? So what is?

Click to expand...

Rainman05 said:

Voted fraud is voter fraud.
Treason is treason.

Click to expand...

Rainman05 said:

I'm not discussing whether voter fraud is treachery, I'm discussing whether it's treason.

Click to expand...

HumanBeing said:

"trea·son noun \ˈtrē-zən\

Definition of TREASON

1
: the betrayal of a trust : treachery
2
: the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign's family"

Attempting to overthrow legitimate government through voter fraud is treason. It might not suit your definitions, but I'm going by what the dictionary says.

As for the religious thing, it's just silly, Christians believe in both the old and new testament. This is the first time I've ever heard anyone try to claim otherwise.


lol? They are the same thing.....

Click to expand...

Rainman05 said:

Not quite. Treachery sounds less pompous than treason. And treachery can mean all varied kinds of betrayal of trust... treason is directly aimed towards betraying the trust of the people (the people are sovereign in a democracy).

I am not here to convince you. Debating is about the exchange of opinions and ideas. I said my piece.

Click to expand...

Rainman05 said:

Again, Christians believe in both the Old and the new testament but to be a Christian you need to follow the teachings of Jesus in the New testament, not the teachings of the old testament. The Old testament is like a prologue in a novel that sets the background so you know in what universe the story is taking part. The New Testament is the entirety of the story, contents and ending. You don't love a book because the prologue is interesting, you love it because the main story with the characters in it is involving and interesting and presents itself properly.

Click to expand...

HumanBeing said:

Again according to Christianity, the old testament is the word of God, and the new testament is the word of Jesus. Jesus was very explicit about getting people to follow the old testament. There is simply no getting around it, Christians believe in both the old and the new testament.

Edit, just to add a few quotes to back up my assertion (and note that when the new testament refers to "the law" it means the laws set out in the old testament):

“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 5:18-19 RSV)

- "It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB)

- Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn’t the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament. "Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest part or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place." (Matthew 5:17 NAB)

- "All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB)

- "Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God." (2 Peter 20-21 NAB)

- Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children according to Old Testament law. Mark.7:9-13 "Whoever curses father or mother shall die" (Mark 7:10 NAB)

- Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating. He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: “He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.” (Matthew 15:4-7)

- Jesus has a punishment even worse than his father concerning adultery: God said the act of adultery was punishable by death. Jesus says looking with lust is the same thing and you should gouge your eye out, better a part, than the whole. The punishment under Jesus is an eternity in Hell. (Matthew 5:27)

- Peter says that all slaves should “be subject to [their] masters with all fear,” to the bad and cruel as well as the “good and gentle.” This is merely an echo of the same slavery commands in the Old Testament. 1 Peter 2:18

- “Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law" (John7:19) and “For the law was given by Moses,..." (John 1:17).

- “...the scripture cannot be broken.” --Jesus Christ, John 10:35

Click to expand...

Again, Christians believe in both the Old and the new testament but to be a Christian you need to follow the teachings of Jesus in the New testament, not the teachings of the old testament.

Click to expand...

Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children according to Old Testament law. Mark.7:9-13 "Whoever curses father or mother shall die" (Mark 7:10 NAB)

Click to expand...

Rainman05 said:

That's the whole point. I don't understand what you don't understand? I'm not saying that the Old testament is null and void of any meaning. I am simply saying that the new Testament is the one that makes you a Christian. And the New testament doesn't contradict the Old Testament in all places.

But the old testament without the new testament makes you a jew, not a Christian. In order to be a Christian, you need to adopt the new Testament too and do according to the teachings of Jesus in the New testament.
It all seems perfectly clear to me. I don't get whats rubbing you or how do you think that putting some quotes from the Bible you somehow counter my arguments. It doesn't.

Click to expand...

Roman05 said:

-> and in many places, they are one and the same. Like not to do adultery or don't murder people.

Click to expand...

Roman05 said:

FYI: some of your comments are dishonest in regards to the quotes:
He doesn't say that they should kill their children, but that children who disobey their parents will die. Like: Don't go near the lake, they are crocodiles there; you disobey, you die.

I can go on with other examples of your dishonesty in representing the quotes.

Click to expand...

HumanBeing said:

Your point was that the death sentence is unchristian. Given that the death sentence (as well as ethnic cleansing in general) are actively prescribed by "the laws" of the old testament, and the new testament specifically claims to be there to uphold those laws, there is nothing "unchristian" about the death penalty. Quite the opposite.

What "rubs me the wrong way" is when people make provably false claims, like the idea that the bible doesn't support the death penalty.


Except the old testament prescribes murder for adulterers and even rape victims, so they really aren't the same at all.



I think that is the only one of the comments that may be open to interpretation. The others are pretty black and white, the old testament even more so.

Click to expand...

Though there has never been a formal declaration from the Orthodox Churches on the use of the punishment, many individual bishops have made statements, condemning the practice as unchristian.[citation needed] This can be seen in Russia which abolished capital punishment after the conversion in the tenth century, declaring it to be inconsistent with Christian mercy (though it was reinstated by later regimes).

Click to expand...

Anglican and Episcopalian [edit]
The Lambeth Conference of Anglican and Episcopalian bishops condemned the death penalty in 1988:
This Conference: ... 3. Urges the Church to speak out against: ... (b) all governments who practice capital punishment, and encourages them to find alternative ways of sentencing offenders so that the divine dignity of every human being is respected and yet justice is pursued;....[14]
Before that date, Anglican Bishops in the House of Lords had tended to vote in favour of the retention of capital punishment

Click to expand...

While all Catholics must therefore hold that "the infliction of capital punishment is not contrary to the teaching of the Catholic Church, and the power of the State to visit upon culprits the penalty of death derives much authority from revelation and from the writings of theologians", the matter of "the advisability of exercising that power is, of course, an affair to be determined upon other and various considerations."[10]
Some Catholic writers, such as the late Cardinal Joseph Bernadin of Chicago, have argued against the use of the death penalty in modern times by drawing on a stance labelled the "consistent life ethic". Characteristic of this approach is an emphasis on the sanctity of human life, and the responsibility on both a personal and social level to protect and preserve life from "womb to tomb" (conception to natural death). This position draws on the conviction that God has "boundless love for every person, regardless of human merit or worthiness."[11] Other Catholic writers, such as Joseph Sobran and Matt Abbott, have criticised this approach, contending that it minimizes the issue of abortion by placing it on the same level as the death penalty – the latter of which the Church does not consider intrinsically immora

Click to expand...

Rainman05 said:

Now the fact that said law was butchered in reality (even by Moses himself who was a mass murderer), is of no consequence. It's there... and it is the word of God, strengthened by Jesus.

It's a mixed bag of orders and encouragements I find. On one hand you have some passages claiming one, then others claiming another.

Click to expand...

Rainman05 said:

Bam

Click to expand...

Federalist said:

Yes, I understand that this is what you think.

However, the fact of the matter is that the OP wrote nothing about the frequency of voter fraud.

Click to expand...

haymarket said:

So the OP throws out the idea of giving the ultimate punishment to a non capital crime with no evidence that it occurs in anything but relatively minor frequency and is no threat to the nation.

Got it.

Click to expand...

Removable Mind said:

Well, it does look like a few in DP would support that. So I guess Draconian Law would be great from some people. I'm not one of those people.

Click to expand...

Federalist said:

Yes, I think you've finally got it. He asks people whether they support the death penalty for voter fraud, while writing nothing about the frequency of voter fraud.

Click to expand...

haymarket said:

So it is merely ridiculous and inane instead of being woefully poorly written, and poorly supported with any evidence in your opinion?

Click to expand...

HumanBeing said:

No, the issue is that it contradicts itself. Like you said, some passages claiming one thing (like "I'm not here to change the laws of the old testament") and other passages that directly contradict it (like saving adulterers from stoning, despite it being in line with old testament law).

In either case, Jesus was very explicit that people should follow the rules from the old testament and that he wasn't there to replace them. Those laws included the death penalty.


Bam what? Did you bump into something?

Click to expand...

Federalist said:

In my opinion? No, I believe that's your opinion.

Click to expand...

Rainman05 said:

Did you read the rest of what I wrote? and the link and all.
Jesus contradicted himself too. by saving adulters he violated the "old testament law" .

so yeah. it's a mixed bag

Click to expand...

haymarket said:

So you believe proposing the death penalty for a non capital crime in which no persons life was taken or even harmed and then failing to demonstrate that it is indeed a national problem which requires such a drastic and severe sanction is perfectly rational and stands as an idea without any further documentation?

Click to expand...

Federalist said:

No, I was simply pointing out that the OP didn't write anything about the frequency of voter fraud.

Click to expand...