it is not some of the articles that are extreme. all fo the
articles are extreme. in fact, the entire website is extremist
pro-bush, not very objective.
number one, their "fallacy" on the Church's stance is a fallacy in
itself. I have clearly read a statement that teh Church prefers
reformative punnishment to the Death Penalty. n funnily, this site
is the first site i have seen that actually rejects what the famous
Black-rights activist Martin luther King said.
number two, being an avid reader of C.S. Lewis, i can easily tell
that the writer of the article has twisted the author's word to fit
his won ends. C.S. Lewis plainly mentions in many of his poems that
he opposes all forms of killing. in one of his poems, he talks
about genocides in Eastern European countries and the Mock trials
in Russia.
number three, European Governments are poisoned in their wells by
being termed as elitist. I watched teh coverage of the Hutton
Report and the parliamentary sitting before that on the BBC and
there is nowhere that implies that the UK government is elitist. in
fact, to me, UK is beginning to look much more democratic than the
Land of the Free.
number four, the writer uses a utilitarian point to talk about
unusuality, which is totally irrevelevant.
number five, even biologists and people in the law profession
concede that DNA testing is not very reliable in determining a
criminal. that i got at a talk i attended last year on
biotech.
number six, the author uses figures for Florida to unjustify the
national estimate. i also have a suspicion that he only read the
results of court proceddings, and not analyzed exactly what each
person said. Obviously, results would show that "not one innocent
person was executed".
number six, i am certain ACLU does proper research before coming up
with such data. anyway, theNew AMerican is so pro-bush that i don't
think it bothers to double-check statistics released byt eh WHite
House.
number seven, although its argument on teh cost could be correct,
nonetheless i don't thnk that cost should even be a factor
considered when one is debating on morality. Does cost decide
morality?
in anutshell, it is safer not to believe the New American
completely, since it is extremely biased and thus, unreliable. SO
CX, try to find some more reliable sources. At least Amnesty is
endorsed by the UN, and thus that loans it some credibility.
the *sighing* pikamaster
