During the 2012 session, the Maryland State Legislature considered the abolition of the death penalty.
Opponents of the practice argued that not everyone receiving the sentence actually committed the crime of which the judicial system found them guilty.
However, having only carried out the practice five times since 1977, it is doubtful such miscarriages of justice have been perpetrated all that often in the jurisdiction under consideration.
State Senator Lissa Gladden, a sponsor of the legislation, said, “I think as a community and a government that we should not be in the business of killing people.”
Senator Gladden certainly has a warped way of implementing that ethical assumption.
According to Maryland Right To Life Incorporated, Gladden voted for stem cell funding that placed no limits on the destructive harvesting of human embryos.
The legislator also voted against an amendment that would have limited taxpayer funding of abortions for reasons of mental health; in other words, for women in a panic that a pregnancy might leave them with stretch marks during swimsuit season.
So in her eyes, if you are a murderer or a rapist, Gladden believers your life is so precious that it is worth saving no matter the horror or carnage you may have wrought in other people’s lives.
However, if you happen to rank among the most innocent or defenseless members of society, Senator Gladden has little problem with snuffing you out in the name of utilitarianism or convenience.
Proverbs 8:36 admonishes that those that hate God love death.
It may seem counterintuitive. But the effort to eliminate the death penalty, when coupled with the effort to legalize homosexual matrimony, indicates that the hatred of the Almighty in this particular state is approaching levels that threaten to unravel those social conventions established from on high designed to protect life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness founded on true virtue.
by Frederick Meekins
Loading ...
1 user commented in " MD Legislator’s Priorities Warped In What Life Is Worth Preserving "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackAlthough I lean philosophically in the same direction as FMeekins, it cannot be denied that there are several notable differences between an adult convicted killer and a human embryo. Most notably, the convict is conscious and aware, whereas the embryo (I’m guessing) has no brain cells with which to reason. Moreover, many human embryos miscarry, sometimes without even being noticed by the mother. These events are not considered murder, but rather a sad loss of what might have been.
I think that the biggest objection to the harvesting of human embryonic stem cells is that it is the beginning of a slippery slope. If we can kill human embryos in order to collect skin cells, then it is only a small step to performing experiments on human embryos. And if human embryos, then why not early-stage human fetuses? And so on.
Leave A Reply