Well, not really. Society's racist, unfortunately, but that doesn't mean the people in it have to be.

Normally I'd make a snarky comment here, but since everyones up in arms about my methods, I'll be direct.

Both of these comments are a little full of themselves. Whats racism got to do - directly - with the death penalty. I get it in regard to this case, but overall? Also, statements like "well I couldn't be less racist"...All I'm going to say is that some day I hope you hear how you sound when you say this.

As for Tumor, who the hell taught you that? What "enlightened" minsanthropic ****tard told you that by living in America you have to hate people based on skin color? I mean, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that maybe you just weren't specific enough, but you need to explain this unless you'd prefer to look like a giant Biggot yourself.

I hate to sound like a Republican here, but just because you targeted a group thats a majority white doesn't mean it isn't prejudicial, biggoted, and ridiculous.

I'm sorry, have I said something outrageous or done something wrong? A statement was made about how a man was executed for race crimes. I stated how I still oppose the death penalty for him even though I abhor racism. In what way does that make me full of myself?

It's not really hating people based on their skin color so much as stereotyping people based on their skin color. Any sociology textbook will tell you that.

Who said anything about empathy with racists? It's easy to feel vindicated over a despicable man's demise; it is much harder to find an absolute justification to pursue it.

I'm merely suggesting that qualifying your morals based upon a presupposed level of guilt is absurd. You're making assumptions based upon perceptions from third (or even fourth) source parties, and fitting your morality to suit the situation.

Which is really what disturbs me most when I hear others calling for blood. Innocence and guilt are indeterminate; life and death...not so much.

Am I calling for his blood? No I am not. I said I don't care that he was killed because he was a sack of **** =)

Am I making assumptions? No I'm not. He clearly was guilty of killing a man because of the color of his skin.

A) If you object to capital punishment (as you claim to), what arbitrary magnitude of crime is necessary to enter your void of indifference?

B) This is what I was referring to in my previous post. Where do you obtain your proof for omniscient judgment?

"To be guilty" is an indeterminate abstraction. It is purely a structure of society to institutionalize the penal system. Absolute guilt cannot be determined, or by any methods otherwise proven; rather, "guilty" is a judgment issued from outside the bounds of awareness and perceptual certainty. It is, therefore, not an infallible index of truth and must be treated with the respect one has for someone that might not be. Which, I'm assuming, is why most people object to the execution of Troy Davis.

When you kill someone because they are a different color of you which is a hate crime I could give to ****s if you die =) It is pretty simple I just think your feeble mind can not grasp that.