Texas bans ALL Clergy from Executions

After getting their asses handed to them by the supreme court for being bigots, Texas has now decided that nobody gets to have religious counselors as the state puts them to death. Because clearly, it’s far more important that state executed murders be done in the most dehumanizing way possible instead of giving a man you’re about to kill a few moments of comfort.

$20 says they reverse that rule right after this guy is executed.

1 Like

As I’ve stated before, elimination of the death penalty would save the taxpayers money & eliminate sticky ones like that involving the Buddhist cleric. Sounds like a First Amendment Freedom of Religion violation to me. Before execution is still living & endowed rights.

1 Like


Do you live in Texas?

How much comfort did they give their victims?

1 Like

Doesn’t matter.

Of course it matters.

Why would how much “comfort” they gave their victims affect a religious liberty right?

No it doesn’t…but I’m ok with them doing this…but I bet they look the other way with their christian murderers.

They don’t have a right to a priest in the execution chamber.

Of course it matters. Did they allow their victims the clergy of their choice?

Yeah we shouldn’t show any compassion. :roll_eyes:

It’s really way past time to ban the dearth penalty anyways.

Did they show compassion? My compassion is reserved for victims and their families. When it comes to the savages, I’m straight out of ■■■■■ to give.

1 Like

Why should someone who has done something worth being executed for get a few minutes of comfort before going straight to hell?

You know, the point of even having the death penalty isn’t to do to the condemned what they did to their victims. Similar to why the state can’t torture people. Bringing up the whole “comfort” thing reminds me of those ridiculous people who think death penalty/punishment should be decided by the victim’s family. Makes no sense.

I disagree. It’s time to execute people in a timely manner, not let them live off the government teat for 20 years while they appeal their conviction.

What exactly do you think the point is?

Why doesn’t it matter?

Well personally, I don’t think there is much point to it. And I don’t want get into a whole long discussion here, but to keep it pretty simple, mainly there is the punishment for crimes aspect, and the removing of someone deemed too dangerous for society. But our justice system is not based on retaliation/revenge.

Only if you increase the standard from beyond a reasonable doubt to beyond any doubt. And there are multiple lines of empirical evidence beyond eye witness testimony.