Why does God need public records? In Alabama, that’s a real question
al.com
al.com
Let’s say you’re the prison. You’re supposed to execute a prisoner tomorrow. You don’t have the drugs to do so.
You could either fail to execute the prisoner, or take a fairly large risk and get illegal methods. Would the prison really lose face if it just said that it didn’t have the means to carry out the execution and thus did not?
The closest thing I see from google is "Trump's Child Detention Camps Cost $775 Per Person Every Day" which is unrelated to this discussion.
Just for kicks and giggles: I wonder if it's $1337.995 per day?
I wonder what correlations exist between prison profitability and inmate death rates.
If prisons are held accountable to their finances, which I assume they are, they’re put into a position where expensive inmates who are budgeted to die must die, else they threaten the entire prison.
https://www.inverse.com/article/4100-the-growing-black-marke...
Not any longer. The Supreme Court ruled this term that prisoners sentenced to die have no right to a comfortable death.
IANAL but I don't think she "had" to answer these questions. I'm not defending Alabama at all here, but depositions are not an open forum where anything goes. She is legally required to answer truthfully, but she doesn't have to answer at all if the question isn't germane. Maybe she opened the door to some of the questions by providing a religious basis for her information request, but most of these questions are completely irrelevant. She should have refused to play the game.
Then again, I still let the TSA and customs perform intrusive searches and ask intrusive questions (that have no bearing on safety) when I travel, because I want to get on with my life. For example, when I return to the US (as a natural born US citizen), immigration will ask me what the purpose of my trip was, where I went, etc. They have no legitimate reason for this, I legally don't have to answer any of the questions, and they cannot refuse me re-entry (assuming they accept the validity of my passport), yet I play their game because at the end of a 10-hour flight and a 2-hour queue, I don't feel like sitting in a cell for 72 hours while they process me.
TSA security theatre on the other hand is a whole different ball of wax. Very little of what they do contributes more to security than prior measures or alternative, less intrusive measures. The fact that programs where you can pay to avoid it exist prove this point. They already have the same level of access to every person thorough the dragnet of law enforcement and intelligence databases that every single air traveler gets processed through. When it's trivially easy to spot numerous gaps in security in every single airport I've been to, it's more a statement to the fact that most people are good than it is to the fact that we're good at catching bad guys. An airport just needs to be a less viable target and bad guys will go elsewhere that's easier.
wat?
The reason why states can't source drugs to use them for killing is because, surprise, the corporations that manufacture them refuse to sell them for that purpose.
Limiting access to abortion is counter to the Supreme Court's decision that abortion is a right.
Limiting the methods of execution is to prevent undue suffering, which violates the constitutional right against cruel and unusual punishment.
That "No" is unwarranted - the strategies differ in the way you say, but they coincide in the way the post your responded to says.
If I scratch you to relieve an itch you can't reach, or I scratch you to violently gouge out your eyes, it's a meaningless comment to say "There's a moral equivalence to the method."
The only "equivalence" between the two original scenarios is that they both involve the verb "limiting," but there is no "moral equivalence" that automatically applies to any action using that verb. Or is there a "moral equivalence" between the laws to limit abortion and my attempts to limit my kid's screentime?
Are you just arguing for the sake of arguing?
> In June of that year, officials in Georgia discovered a work-around: a small-time businessman in London named Mehdi Alavi, who sold wholesale drugs through a company called Dream Pharma, would ship sodium thiopental to them. Georgia bought some from him, and then Arkansas did too. With Hospira offline, Alavi had the U.S. execution market cornered. Arizona bought sodium thiopental from him in late September and used it the next month to execute a convicted murderer named Jeffrey Landrigan. California placed an order as well.
> Maya Foa, an anti-death-penalty advocate based in London, saw Dream Pharma mentioned in court documents related to Landrigan’s execution and decided to pay a visit. At the company’s address, she found a small building with peeling white paint and a placard that read elgone driving academy. Inside she found two desks and, in the back of the room, a single cabinet. That was it: Dream Pharma. Alavi imported execution drugs from elsewhere in Europe and shipped them to the United States, using that cupboard in a driving school as his base of operations.
...
> Since Hospira had been the only FDA-approved supplier of sodium thiopental, states that had imported it had done so illegally. Prisons had become, in effect, drug smugglers, and while the FDA may have been willing to look the other way, the DEA was not. In March 2011, agents seized Georgia’s supply of sodium thiopental. In April, they seized Tennessee’s, Kentucky’s, South Carolina’s, and Alabama’s.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lTczPEG8iI
tl;dw: No physician worth his/her salt will go anywhere near prescribing drugs for lethal injection (Hippocratic Oath and what not) so states and prisons use non-medical-trained personnel to choose, source, and administer the drugs.
I like Dennis Prager's commentary on the 10 commandments[1]
...according to you or the Catholic Church. What other reasons do you have for there not being a death penalty?
13 And he declared unto you his covenant, which he commanded you to perform, even ten commandments; and he wrote them upon two tables of stone.
14 And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and judgments, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go over to possess it.
15 Take ye therefore good heed unto yourselves; for ye saw no manner of similitude on the day that the Lord spake unto you in Horeb out of the midst of the fire:
16 Lest ye corrupt yourselves, and make you a graven image, the similitude of any figure, the likeness of male or female,
17 The likeness of any beast that is on the earth, the likeness of any winged fowl that flieth in the air,
18 The likeness of any thing that creepeth on the ground, the likeness of any fish that is in the waters beneath the earth
Deuteronomy 4:12-18
Like, what exactly is your average, normal pro-life person who happens to also kinda support gun control and kinda oppose the death penalty and maybe even favor universal healthcare supposed to do, in the voting booth? Recall that their belief may be that abortion is equal to or at least very close to baby murder, before answering. Their options come down to voting for a 3rd party that's pro-life but agrees with them on some other positions, which is so close to not voting that they may as well be identical and anyway I'm not sure such a party exists (usually they're more extreme, if anything), voting anti-baby-murder but also against all their other positions, or voting pro-baby-murder but for the other things they like. This is clearly not a great position to be in.
So rather than going around feeling shitty about their own politics all the time, they soften or reverse their opposition to bundled views they wouldn't otherwise agree with.
[EDIT] this was highly visible in the last Presidential election, when a lot of the "WTF happened?" interviews afterward went like "yeah, of course Trump seems like a slimy piece of crap, obviously, I mean have you listened to the guy talk and have we all forgotten how he was, not that long ago, the universal media symbol for highly-successful rich scam artists? But I prayed on it and in the end held my nose and voted for him, because judicial appointments and Roe v. Wade".
At least both sides get to take their turn at the helm. Seems to work okay to me.
The article discusses a member of the clergy who requested information about Alabama’s death penalty protocols to help her “pray on” the issue. The state pushed back, and “why does God need to know this information” was a snarky question asked of the clergy woman by the state’s lawyer. So the religious person and the entity executing people are on opposite sides of the issue. The state’s response could just as easily have come from an atheist.
In any case, the word means murder, not any killing. This is plainly true in that soldiers are not immediately called to abandon their posts.
I'd love to hear something official just to know how best to criticize the hypocrites...
The 10 commands are a simple summary of OT law. They are a good guide, but the full OT law is (as any set of laws) complex and messy. The full law if you kill someone you will be killed in return, with a very complex set of exceptions for accidental killing.
Christianity is a bit different, generally believing the old law (including those gruesome punishments) to be done away with, but there are still scriptures in support of local governing authorities. The more commonly cited scripture is Paul's letter to the Romans (Chapter 13, verses 1-2):
> Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
There are a few other examples, but at least from a Christian point of view, the guiding principal is to presume that the government is at least partially put in place by the hand of God, and should generally be respected.
(Disclaimer: I am not a religious person, but I grew up in a religious household.)
Ignore the parent, he's just spouting random inflammatory bull crap.
Primarily withholding of highway funding again
Alabama didn't even get electricity without the feds, theyre very financially tied up with the feds to masquerade as representative of a developed nation
We can single out Alabama without mentioning Alabama specifically
They’ll get the benefits of being a state after conforming and dissolving their theocratic government
That is the prisoners in question have some privacy that should be respected.
What she's asking for is public, and perhaps asking "why" might be allowed. But preventing access in any way to public information unacceptable.
There is lots of other text about drugs and such in their, but it doesn't seem to be the subject of her request. Instead I read it as a side discussion. Worth investigating - and thus worth the records, but the forms would be filled out differently if so.
Requesting their names wouldn’t make any sense anyway. That’s already publicly available.
>Isner has strong opinions about the death penalty (like a lot of people do). She’s an ordained minister, although she doesn’t lead a church (her husband does, though). Later she would run for Congress against Rep. Martha Roby (Isner lost).
>When she filled out the form she said what a lot of politicians and preachers say when confronted with a prickly question: She wanted to pray on it.
>Next to “Proposed Use of Records” she wrote: “As a member of the clergy, I feel a spiritual obligation to pray over executions. To do this most effectively, I need to have a detailed understanding of how executions are carried out.”
Can you indicate which bit of this is confusing to you?
And did you just conjour up the bit about her wanting their names, entirely from whole cloth? As it is nowhere is the text.