In response to:

Why Don Opposes Capital Rape

Gilbert32 Wrote: Apr 20, 2013 10:05 AM
The endless habeas corpus litigation that has developed in death penalty cases is the problem. You lawyers out there correct me if I'm wrong, but don't these habeas corpus cases begin AFTER the Supreme Court has already rejected the condemned's appeal? Isn't the normal Constitutional appeals process in a state case trial court-intermediate state appellate court-state supreme court-US Supreme Court? If the state supreme court is the final arbiter of state law, and the US Supreme Court is the final arbiter of federal law, wouldn't all of these endless habeas corpus based appeals be precluded by the fact that, in those cases, the Supreme Court has already ruled? If so, the aren't the lawyers that bring such actions, and the local federal
Gilbert32 Wrote: Apr 20, 2013 10:09 AM
judges that entertain such actions, guilty of legal or judicial malpractice? Perhaps the state lawyer licensing authorities should begin stripping those guilty lawyers and judges of their lawyer licenses.

Don is angry with me. He cannot understand why I support punishing rapists with death while simultaneously defending the rights of the unborn. He accuses me of applying double standards, promoting hypocrisy, and of being "inconsistent." But I am perfectly consistent in my beliefs. And, truth be known, so is Don.

The reason so many people are unfairly labeled as "inconsistent" is because the term "double standard" is applied in such a haphazard fashion. People are actually guilty of applying a double standard when they treat two identical things differently. On the other hand, they are not applying a double standard...