November 21, 2020

The first and last sentences of a Washington Post article titled "Supreme Court continues capital punishment trend with Barrett on the bench."

First sentence: "The Supreme Court continued its trend late Thursday night of allowing federal executions to go forward, with new Justice Amy Coney Barrett participating in her first capital punishment case on the court." 

Last sentence: "Hall and three others drove the teenager to a motel room in Arkansas, where they assaulted her and then beat her with a shovel before she was buried alive."

ADDED: Notice the switch to the passive voice: "they assaulted her and then beat her with a shovel before she was buried alive." Who buried her alive? 

AND: The writer of the WaPo article, Robert Barnes, draws attention to Barrett's religion:
In 1998, she co-wrote a law review article, titled “Catholic Judges in Capital Cases,” that described the tensions. She suggested judges who felt they could not be impartial because of their faith should recuse and wrote, “Catholic judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty.”  
Questioned about that when she was nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, Barrett, then a Notre Dame law professor, said she would not be willing to enter an order of execution if she were a trial judge, but it was different for appellate judges considering issues of law in the case of someone already on death row. 
The highest-rated comment is: 
It's interesting how some hypocrites justify their views, as a strong Catholic, it peculiar how she is comfortable deviating from Church doctrine for capital punishment, but is rigid when it comes to an abortion that may save the life of the mother or who has become pregnant through rape or incest. 

I find hypocrites like Amy Coney Barrett pretty repugnant. 

Legally, there's no hypocrisy. Both positions represent judicial restraint — deference to legislative choices. If there were no right to have an abortion, it would be left to legislatures to regulate access to abortions, and judges would merely be allowing those statutes to be enforced. Similarly, the death penalty is available only where statutes provide for it. 

I understand the enthusiasm, among liberals, for attacking the new Supreme Court Justice, but the hypocrisy charge is unsound, and, ironically, it's hypocritical to attack her for not using her religion as a basis for decisions in the case of the death penalty. At the confirmation hearings, she was attacked for seeming as though she might allow her religion to affect her decisions. 

86 comments:

alanc709 said...

First, it's "the death penalty is cruel and must be abolished." Then, it's "life without parole is cruel and must be abolished". Then, crime is just "white supremacists holding down the oppressed, so defund the police". Until finally, "Jails are racist and must be abolished". That boring enough for you?

DEEBEE said...

You are the master. I eluded over it several times, despite your pointing out. Stand humbled at my perceived skill at “micro-toning” MSM word blocks

tim maguire said...

The last sentence of the article...of course it is.

I’m opposed to the death penalty, but it’s appalling the lengths critics are going to to hide this man’s crimes.

Marcus said...

The writer AND the editor are guilty of bias, the editor more so as he had the chance to correct it.

Marcus said...

This editor would re-write this thusly: "they assaulted her and then beat her with a shovel before burying her alive."

Expat(ish) said...

What choir were they in?

-XC

Greg Hlatky said...

Webster and Hall went to the front door of the apartment and knocked. The occupant of the apartment, Lisa Rene, N. Rene's sixteen-year-old sister, refused to let them in and called her sister and 911. After Webster unsuccessfully attempted to kick in the door, he and Hall went around to a sliding glass door on the patio and saw that Lisa Rene was on the telephone. Hall shattered the glass door with his baseball bat, Webster entered the apartment, tackled Lisa Rene, and dragged her to the car. Hall and Beckley had returned to the car when they heard the sound of breaking glass. Webster forced Lisa Rene onto the floorboard of the car, and the group drove to Ross's apartment in Irving, Texas. Once there, they exited the Cadillac and forced Lisa Rene into the backseat of Beckley's car. Hall got in the backseat as well. Beckley got in the driver's seat, and Webster got in the front passenger seat. The group then drove off again. During the drive, Hall raped Lisa Rene and forced her to perform oral sex on him. The group later returned to Ross's apartment.

From there, Beckley, Hall, and Webster drove Lisa Rene to Pine Bluff. Hall remained in Irving and flew back to Arkansas the next day. Once Beckley, Hall, and Webster reached Pine Bluff, they obtained money from Holloway to get a motel room. In the motel room, they tied Lisa Rene to a chair and raped her repeatedly.

Hall and Holloway arrived at the motel room on Sunday morning, September 25, 1994. They went into the bathroom with Lisa Rene for approximately fifteen to twenty minutes. When Hall and Holloway came out of the bathroom, Hall told Beckley, "She know too much." Hall, Holloway, and Webster then left the motel.

Later that afternoon, Hall and Webster went to Byrd Lake Park and dug a grave. That same evening, Hall, Webster, and Beckley took Lisa Rene to Byrd Lake Park, but could not find the grave site in the dark. They then returned to the motel room. In the early morning of Monday, September 26, 1994, Beckley and Hall moved Lisa Rene to another motel because they believed that the security guard at the first motel was growing suspicious.

Later the same morning, Webster, Hall, and Beckley again drove Lisa Rene to Byrd Lake Park. Lisa Rene's eyes were covered by a mask. Hall and Webster led the way to the grave site, with Beckley guiding Lisa Rene by the shoulders. At the grave site, Hall turned Lisa Rene's back toward the grave and placed a sheet over her head. He then hit her in the head with a shovel. Lisa Rene screamed and started running. Beckley grabbed her, and they both fell down. Beckley then hit Lisa Rene in the head twice with the shovel and handed it to Hall. Webster and Hall then began taking turns hitting her with the shovel. Webster then gagged Lisa Rene and dragged her into the grave. He covered her with gasoline and shoveled dirt back into the grave. Hall, Beckley, and Webster then returned to the motel and picked up Hall.

- US v. Hall, United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit

So it wasn't for stealing a loaf of bread to feed his starving family after all.

rwnutjob said...

Shot: OMG ACB will rule based on her religion
Chaser: ACB is ruling by the law instead of her religion

gilbar said...

hmmm
one of them, Webster; was intellectually disabled; that is: STUPID

A) all colored people are STUPID, why should ANY of them suffer ANY penalty, for ANY THING?
B) Lisa Rene was a colored person TOO; it's NOT like they were hurting WHITE WOMEN
C) can't we, as politically correct liberals, realize that the only problem with these statements is the inversion of the words color and person?

Steven said...

I think many people misunderstand, or deliberately misrepresent, the Catholic church's position on the death penalty in order to use it as a cudgel against conservatives.

Clearly, the bible endorses capital punishment. The death penalty is not morally wrong in principle. Justice means giving people what they deserve and, in some cases, what they deserve is death. The church's position is that in modern times there are alternative punishments so that criminals might repent and that should be preferred. The position is contingent on some degree of state capacity.

This is in contrast to abortion, which is considered unconditionally morally wrong.

RMc said...

I find hypocrites like Amy Coney Barrett pretty repugnant.

"Only right-leaning hypocrites, though. Left-leaning hypocrites are OK."

Jersey Fled said...

I find hypocrites like Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden repugnant.

Fixed it for you.

Leland said...

Reading Greg Hlatkey @6:02am; and yeah, that's why I support the death penalty.

mesquito said...

I’m so old I remember Bill Clinton bragging about how many “death penalties “ he added to federal law.

DavidUW said...

Death penalty is allowable in Catholicism. Ignore the current antipope.

Temujin said...

Amazing that the writer of the article and the commenters spend their time singling out Justice Barrett as the problem in this case. Not the thugs who assaulted her, beat her, and buried her alive. Justice Barrett is the problem. She's "repugnant." They're saying that it's not just her religion that pisses them off, it's her deviation from it in this case, but not in the killing of babies.

These people seriously think of themselves as our moral betters and the moral compass for all of Western Civilization.

Howard said...

Catholics are over represented on SCOTUS

Matt said...

Doesn't the left believe the world is overpopulated? That we need abortion and euthanasia to reduce the impact to resources and the environment? Why don't they support stuff like this?

They should push for everyone on death row to be executed immediately, oppose all efforts to stop COVID, end research into cancer, etc. Otherwise they are hypocrites.

And this dude got to breathe for another 26 years. That's the real injustice here. And the WAPOO commenter's rampant misogyny.

Matt said...

Catholics are over represented on SCOTUS.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You misspelled "Jews".

William said...

Anyone can feel morally superior to those people who committed such a ghastly crime. Big deal. You disapprove of beating and burying alive your rape victim. But it takes truly superior morality, the kind of morality that only the elect of God enjoy, to look down upon Justice Barrett for applying the death penalty here. We are truly blessed to have such enlightened people walk among us and show us the way forward. Their superior morality entitles them to cast the first stone and their superior intellect directs them to cast that stone at Justice Barrett.

BidenFamilyTaxPayerFundedCrackPipe said...

The left stand shoulder to shoulder with the "thems" who would murder a woman in the horrific and heinous way.

BidenFamilyTaxPayerFundedCrackPipe said...

I like dead murderers.

I'm not catholic.

Leftist Nazi hearts bleed for the lowest common denominator.

brylun said...

After reading Greg Hlatky's comment at 6:02am, all I can say is

"Where is Judge Dredd when you need him?"

Wince said...

Luckily, we have video of Amy Coney Barrett in Supreme Court deliberations over the death penalty.

"Well, just execute him!"

iowan2 said...

Steven, thanks for giving your take, on the Church's take, regarding capital punishment. I'll include it in my fact set.

I have always been very clear about the peoples power to put convicted criminals to death for committing capital crimes. There is no room for debate about this.

But now, it has become clear the Government, by the actions of its agents, no longer can be trusted.
Government abuse in the legal process is becoming more clear by the day. From policing, through prosecution, and up to judicial rulings, are clearly corrupt. I can no longer trust the govt to abide by the will of the people, as expressed through our elected representatives.

From the FBI abusing the surveillance powers of the govt, with FISA warrants doctored to seek political power, to the inability to simply count votes, to prosecutors abusing power in selective prosecution, ala, Smollett, it is plain the govt is corrupt.

While this case "sounds" cut and dried, I assume the govt actors are corrupt, and the media only provides what ever facts push their prefered narrative, and where facts are absent, the media will just doctor and alter what is available, to cement the "proper" public opinion.
We are left with erring on the side of assuming the govt is lying to us.

BidenFamilyTaxPayerFundedCrackPipe said...

The Aurora Theater shooter - who ended the lives of I think it was 12 or 14 people including a few young children.
he is still alive breathing in air thanks to one pussy leftist male (probably gay) juror asshole.

steve uhr said...

Huh? Who buried her alive? Obviously the same people who assaulted her and beat her with a shovel. What am I missing?

William said...

I'm confused about this. Hillary Clinton, who I look to for moral guidance on such thorny issues, has chortled and congratulated herself over the death of Qaddaffi. Obama thinks he's really good at killing people. Bin- Laden was executed without any semblance of due process. Some people deserve to die but not rapists who bury their victims alive.

iowan2 said...

Steve Uhr, what you are missing is the fact our host is pointing out the disingenuous use of the passive voice by the reporter. A clear manipulative tactic of leftist media curating the "news" for masses. (it's kind of the corner stone of the whole post).

Sam L. said...

It's from the WaPoo, which I despise, detest, and distrust as much as I do the NYT.

BidenFamilyTaxPayerFundedCrackPipe said...

The religion of the corrupt left is the religion of the corrupt left. There is no higher god.

BUMBLE BEE said...

I must consult my higher power. What would Whoopi do?

Kate said...

What's interesting (or scandalous, depending on if you're Catholic) is that Barrett herself misrepresents what her own faith states.

And, no, Francis' personal and irregular rewrite of the Catechism doesn't count.

Paul Zrimsek said...

The dogma lives semiaudibly within her.

hombre said...

“I understand the enthusiasm, among liberals ....”

These people to whom you refer are not liberals. They are lefties and probably fascists (sans the ultranationalism). Limbaugh cleverly popularized the demonization of “liberals” years ago. However, these modern Democrats and their consorts bear no resemblance to “liberals.”

Here’s one definition of “liberal”: “2. a political and social philosophy advocating individual freedom, representational forms of government, progress and reform, and protection of civil liberties.“ See anything in there that resembles these assholes?

Fascism? Let’s ask Benito: “1.’Everything in the state’. The Government is supreme and ... all-encompasing, and all within it must conform to the ruling body, often a dictator. 2.’Nothing outside the state’.”

David Begley said...

Greg

Thanks for posting those horrific facts. Death penalty too good for them.

Big Mike said...

The Post’s Robert Barnes Left out that Lisa Rene was doused with gasoline and set on fire before being tossed into the shallow grave and buried while still alive.

Birkel said...

Two Alrhouse posts in a row about bad guys who deserved death.
Theme?

Iman said...

I condemn the liberal “enthusiasm”. It’s as repugnant as they are.

Bob Smith said...

The only reason I am opposed to the death penalty is there are DA’s like that Nifong t**d in North Carolina. And prosecutors like Mike are why you can’t have the DP. Sorry about that.

John henry said...

hombre said...


Here’s one definition of “liberal”: “2. a political and social philosophy advocating individual freedom, representational forms of government, progress and reform, and protection of civil liberties.

OT but amen, amen and amen.

Nothing new of course, Hayek in 1944 called it "a great word that that has been hijacked to mean it's exact opposite" Road to Serfdom, quote from memory.

Those, like me, who consider themselves liberal often have to modify it to "classical liberal"

Screw 'em. I'm just a plain old liberal.

John Henry

Mike of Snoqualmie said...


Kim Jong Un rejected our plan for denuking North Korea after John Bolton told them we'd use the "Libya model." The Libya model turned Khaddaffi from an adversary into a client, a client who stopped causing trouble throughout the world and just oppressed his own people. Hillary wanted to reclaim Khaddaffi's wealth, so she encouraged the Libyans to start a civil war, and eventually execute Khaddaffi. Said civil war is still ongoing and terrorists operate from Libyan soil. All thanks to Hillary Clinton, Queen of Graft.

SGT Ted said...

So, the Big Fear was that we were told that ACB would inflict her Religion on America. But when she puts it aside, keeping her religion separate from the State, we're told that it is Bad that she did not inflict her religion on America.

Progs are so full of shit it still astounds me.

Ken B said...

Would it be hypocritical for a Chief Justice to swear in a president he voted against?

Mike of Snoqualmie said...

hombre said:

Fascism? Let’s ask Benito: “1.’Everything in the state’. The Government is supreme and ... all-encompasing, and all within it must conform to the ruling body, often a dictator. 2.’Nothing outside the state’.”

Further amplification: You belong to the state. You will be made to obey the state.

When leftists call for "reeducation camps", they are calling for implementation of the hive mind: you must think like us.

wild chicken said...

Oh, the defendant is "mentally disabled."


I guess they would allseem that way.

bagoh20 said...

"" Who buried her alive? "

The shovel did it. That's why we need national shovel control and a shovel registry. Nobody needs a shovel when they can just call 911 to get the municipal digging department to take care of it at some future time safely by trained diggers.

The Genius Savant said...

Also, the WAPO commenter has no idea what he/she is talking about as there has never been any abortion necessary to "save the life of the mother".

bagoh20 said...

"Oh, the defendant is "mentally disabled."

Are we to assume that someone who did that crime could be mentally normal? Even if he became a model prisoner and a sensitive poet, is what happed to her then forgiven? Forgotten? Just an accident?

bagoh20 said...

"The only reason I am opposed to the death penalty is there are DA’s like that Nifong t**d in North Carolina."

That's a simple fix. Any death penalty needs to meet certain criteria to be carried out, including the crime has to be heinous, with guilt beyond any doubt under careful review eliminating any chance of judicial or prosecutorial malpractice. Not endless appeals. One year of review and then the deed is done or not. It would be near impossible to make a mistake with that. The alternative is endless mistakes that include the killer outliving most of the family of the victim, and/or the murderer killing others in prison.

BidenFamilyTaxPayerFundedCrackPipe said...

Did WaPo inquire as to the political make up of the shovel and the woman? You don't look at the crime, after-all. you look at the politics. Was the woman Catholic? She probably deserved to die? Right leftists? It's what Che would have wanted.

My guess is the shovel is a democrat. Democrats in power and their loyal hivemind stand shoulder to shoulder with democratic shovels.

Mike (MJB Wolf) said...

Iowan2 he is not missing it. He does not care. He will purposely avoid noticing it.

rcocean said...

Better headline: Justices refuse to let personal preferences overturn state decision. BTW, the liberal/leftists are basically saying Judges should vote their religion. And I can't argue with that.

BidenFamilyTaxPayerFundedCrackPipe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
AZ Bob said...

Catholics are over represented on SCOTUS

Is that a bad thing?

Big Mike said...

Two Alrhouse posts in a row about bad guys who deserved death. Theme?

Three, if you count that stinkin’ racist boulder that needs to be jackhammered into pea gravel!!!

BidenFamilyTaxPayerFundedCrackPipe said...

Only the corrupt morally bankrupt left can make someone strong enough and thoughtful enough to
beat someone with a shovel and then bury them alive---> into
an innocent victim... who is mentally disabled. Too mentally disabled to pay retribution? to the left - the universal answer is yes.


I really do not care if the vile act was carried out by someone determined to be "mentally disabled". (which we all know is a BS work-around) So what? Why would his mentally disability make him above the law?


I see a parallel with leftists generally thinking they and their corrupt leaders are above the law as well.

Joe Smith said...

From what I can tell, the Church's change in their stance on the death penalty came under Pope Francis, and Francis is a communist/socialist so there's no surprise there.

After the proper trials and appeals (let's set a reasonable time limit of ten years), all death penalties should be mandated to be public events.

Either televised or performed in the town square.

A member of the victim's family should be given the option to act as executioner.

Works for me.

Greg Hlatky said...

I actually question the death penalty in most cases for several reasons.

1) It can create unnecessary martyrs. Of course, Sacco and Vanzetti and the Rosenburgs were as guilty as hell but whining leftists made them into victims of the state. The facts were forgotten. By the way, has anyone heard from Mumia recently?

2) Maladminstration of justice. No one goes into public service except for ambition, lack of responsibility and accountability and wielding of power over subjects (as we now are). Prosecutors care less for determining facts and having justice properly done than they do for running up the score and making their office a stepping stone for advancement. I would hate for anyone to be put to death because some ambitious DA suppressed facts and coerced lies from witnesses.

3) Disparate impact. Women routinely walk for crimes that men get the death penalty administered. Naturally, women always pull out the "it was self-defense, he abused me!" card, which always works on gullible juries full of wine moms.

Amadeus 48 said...

"...and, ironically, it's hypocritical to attack her for not using her religion as a basis for decisions in the case of the death penalty. At the confirmation hearings, she was attacked for seeming as though she might allow her religion to affect her decisions."

To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, well, there they go again. I question whether her critics were sincere in either instance. I think they are just opposed to any GOP nominee.

By the way, what about "Hall and three others drove the teenager to a motel room in Arkansas, where they assaulted her and then beat her with a shovel before she was buried alive"? I don't support the death penalty (too many mistakes; too long a process; lock them up forever), but I don't think it is cruel and unusual punishment. It looks like these guys earned it.

Wilbur said...

I used to laugh when someone would argue that mental "deficiency" was a matter to be taken as mitigation in a death case. On the contrary, I consider it militating.

What do you do with a mad dog?

Amadeus 48 said...

Hmmm...I just looked into the facts of the case. It happened 26 years ago. The victim was an innocent 16 year-old black girl whose brother was involved in a drug deal gone bad. She was kidnapped, gang-raped over four days, hit with a shovel, and buried alive.

26 years ago. That guy got a lot of life in that his victim never saw. But that is the problem with the death penalty...it takes too long. The various delays late in the game were all tehnical--no prescription for the execution drugs; blacks excluded from the jury, (what, black people would have thought the Lisa Rene deserved it?); no proper notification of the execution date; etc.

Lock them up and throw away the key. If they are later exonerated, at least you can let them out.

mockturtle said...

The only thing wrong with the death penalty is that it is so seldom applied and so often reversed. Why should a convicted murderer live ten to twenty years on 'death row' at our expense? He/she will likely live longer on death row than out on the street. There is nothing cruel about the death penalty other than to the public waiting for it to be enforced.

Mike of Snoqualmie said...

George Soros is funding election campaigns for "public defender" district attorneys. DAs who would rather see the guilty prey on the innocent than lock prosecute and convict them. It's all about "restorative justice" which is neither restorative nor justice. It's about sending money to left-wing groups that promote “Restorative Community Pathways” than actually obtaining justice.

YoungHegelian said...

She suggested judges who felt they could not be impartial because of their faith should recuse and wrote, “Catholic judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty.”

Actually, the Church Fathers & the later Scholastic were generally okay with capital punishment. I mean, what were the other available choices? No society previous to modern 1st world liberal societies could afford to imprison men for decades. So, pre-modern punishment involves a lot of corporal punishment & bodily maiming. It's cheap, it's fast, and it makes the point in a brutally efficient way.

As an example, let's grab a quotation from St. Thomas:

Summa Theologica, II; 65-2; 66-6.

If a man is a danger to the community, threatening it with disintegration by some wrongdoing of his, then his execution for the healing and preservation of the common good is to be commended. Only the public authority, not private persons, may licitly execute malefactors by public judgement. Men shall be sentenced to death for crimes of irreparable harm or which are particularly perverted.

I was surprised to find in my readings that St. Thomas even supports the death penalty for those obdurate in heresy! I reading in the hopes of discovering that he supported the death penalty for those miscreants who leave shopping carts in parking spaces, one of my favorite pet peeves.

mockturtle said...

I reading in the hopes of discovering that he supported the death penalty for those miscreants who leave shopping carts in parking spaces, one of my favorite pet peeves.

Hear, hear, YH!!!

Attonasi said...

bagoh20 said...

That's a simple fix. Any death penalty needs to meet certain criteria to be carried out, including the crime has to be heinous, with guilt beyond any doubt under careful review eliminating any chance of judicial or prosecutorial malpractice. Not endless appeals. One year of review and then the deed is done or not. It would be near impossible to make a mistake with that. The alternative is endless mistakes that include the killer outliving most of the family of the victim, and/or the murderer killing others in prison.

People found guilty of this could also be given a choice: face exile to an island with no outside interaction populated with people like them or death.

It doesn't even have to be an island. Just an empty spot in the Texas desert. Put Geofence tags in their hip bone or spine and let them know that if they leave those boundaries they explode or Texans get to hunt them.

Attonasi said...

What is the purpose of jails?

Do they do what they were designed to do? What were they designed to do?

Are jails even a good idea?

Do they serve a community that is based on popular sufferance?

mockturtle said...

Scottish law in the 1700's decreed that execution had to be carried out within two weeks of sentencing.

n.n said...

Planned Perp (PP)? What did they do to justify elective abortion? Bigots. Lose your Pro-Choice quasi-religion ("ethics").

Big Mike said...

Of course, Sacco and Vanzetti and the Rosenburgs were as guilty as hell ...

I remember some years ago reading an analysis that eloquently argued one of the pair, Sacco or Vanzetti, I forget which, was probably innocent while the other was certainly guilty. It’s been too long to remember which was which, though. I’ve never figured out why the Rosenbergs, just couriers, were executed while the actual atomic spy, Klaus Fuchs, got only 9 years.

Leland said...

Steve ur @8:15am

If you reread the sentence, there is no "who" to obviously be one of the assaulters. It simply says she was buried alive later. For all the sentence is worth, it is not even clear that anyone killed her at all.

Althouse is essentially pointing out this information is important to understand the rest of the article, yet it is the last paragraph and written in a way to suggest the accused where not even involved in her death. Sure they assaulted her, but that's not worthy of the death penalty. However, killing someone and burying the body to hide the evidence is usually enough to get a conviction. It shows not just a willingness to kill, but forethought of how to get away with it so you might do it again. But if that sentence was all that existed as evidence (and it is all that is presented), then these guys only raped and hit her.

Rusty said...

Big Mike
"I’ve never figured out why the Rosenbergs, just couriers, were executed while the actual atomic spy, Klaus Fuchs, got only 9 years."
The Rosenbergs recruited other people in sensitive industries to spy as well. That's probably what did it.

Unknown said...

The Washington Post is repugnant.

bagoh20 said...

"Catholics are over represented on SCOTUS"

Agreed. So what?

I'm a long way from being Catholic, and don't get it at all, but I would be very comfortable having a Catholic be the judge in my case. I'd even prefer it.

bagoh20 said...

"People found guilty of this could also be given a choice: face exile to an island with no outside interaction populated with people like them or death."

I think this is as good and fair a solution as possible, except I wouldn't give them a choice. Go live in a place that operates under your moral code. Good luck. Then we periodically execute whoever rises to leader of island and his entourage.

Joe Smith said...

"Catholics are over represented on SCOTUS"

When Ginsberg was alive, there were 9 Jewish justices...33.33%

The percentage of Jews in the country is 2.2%

Talk about over-representation...

DavidUW said...

I'll take St. Thomas over Francis the talking antipope any day.

Wince said...

People found guilty of this could also be given a choice: face exile to an island with no outside interaction populated with people like them or death.

Just like Snake Plissken in Escape from New York!

"You now have the option to terminate and be cremated on the premises. If you elect this option, notify the Duty Sergeant in your Processing Area."

(Voice of Jamie Lee Curtis.)

Skippy Tisdale said...

It's interesting how some hypocrites such as Nancy Pelosi justify their views, as a strong Catholic, it's peculiar how she is comfortable deviating from Church doctrine on abortion, but is rigid when it comes to capital punishment.

Jupiter said...

steve uhr said...
"What am I missing?"

I have speculated about that.

Jupiter said...

In the past, European societies used execution and exile freely, to punish what we would now regard as trivial property crimes, as well as more serious offenses. It has been argued that these punishments, which remove the offender from the gene pool, were applied so widely as to be a strong evolutionary pressure, accounting for the relatively non-violent and law-abiding character of modern European populations.

I'm Not Sure said...

"We are left with erring on the side of assuming the govt is lying to us."

The government is going to do whatever is in their (not your) best interest. Tell the truth, lie, whatever.

Assume that, and you'll not go too far off the rails.

mockturtle said...

Jupiter @6:44: LOLOLOL! :-D

Unknown said...

Perhaps the left would be more comfortable with the death penalty if it were understood as belated abortion.

-- The Mansplainer

Dave said...

Fitting to use an attack on a woman to attack a woman.