DEATH PENALTY is better than NO PENALTY

Rebuttals to her original argument: 1: Although it is true that when there are more executions less murder occurs, the number of deaths stays roughly the same throughout all of the years, so your allah would still have the same number of MURDERED people to terrorize. 2: Really the death penalty solves criminal cases? That is a sad argument, the death penalty kills a person. It does not prove that someone is guilty of a crime. 3. Ok? ?? It's irrelevant whether people support it or not that does nothing to prove that the death penalty is better than no penalty. 4. Once again it is irrelevant whether it is just or not, just because some people think that it's just doesn't make it any better. 5. You're simply presenting information that you think will happen if there is no penalty. In your argument you present no proof, no examples and no expert study that has been going on for decades. You have given the viewers and I no reason to believe anything that you said in this statement will actually happen. May someone also inform me on what a chattle is, I can't find it in the dictionary. Rebuttal to my oppponents rebuttal: 1. As most religions would agree, having to kill someone is far from a "Good Result. " You act like every inmate that we have is a serial killer who is going to kill fifty people. The truth is that less than one percent of the murderers in the U. S. are serial killers. (Source: . http://www.fbi.gov...) 2. Please inform me if a woman actually does that. I would like to also inform you that in an anarchy people could still use self-defense without killing each other. In an anarchy nothing is under control, so the people could easily 'defy' government law and make their own penalty. Like nailing her to cross. As we learned from Jesus it's hard to escape off of a cross. 3. Who's this Justice? Justice is not a living thing so therefore, like most inanimate ideas, it cannot demand anything. Our moral status is a matter of opinion and is not set in stone, like the ten commandments. One persons moral status can be far different from anothers so therefore generalising the moral status of a species is impossible to do so effectively. Many people in Nazi Germany strongly believed that Hitler was a good person and thought that he was doing a good deed to everybody in killing millions of people. Religion: I thank you for dissecting the holy books of the top four religions in the world to find a phrase or two that you can misinterpret to make it sound like these religions promote killing people. Christianity: First of all, Lectivus is not god, he is not the person who made ten commandments. It is not my fault that he let his beliefs get in the way of gods beliefs when he was writing this statement. To reiterate myself, god clearly wrote on a stone tablet, "Thou Shall Not Kill. " Your quote from Exodus is not even mentioning the death penalty. It is referencing that this sorry individual will likely spend an eternity with satan. Islam: I question the credibility of my opponents statement when she only quotes the words, "Spreading mischief in the land" from the Quran. I also question whether the Islamic people were technologically advanced enough so that they could commit "Air piracy" at the time the Quran was created. Hinduism: You are saying that the people who burn themselves alive to promote peace and not war, support killing people. You are a sad sad person. Buddhism: You are once again misinterpreting a holy book of the world. "You have to give your own" is NOT a statement that supports the death penalty. It rather promotes a dedication of serving the family of the one that you have commited this crime to. I once again thank you for attempting to (inappropriate word) on the holy books of the world. I hope that you feel great about yourself for offending nearly the entire world by misinterpreting their core beliefs of their existence and thinking that they support killng people.