[Chewbacca]

With consideration of my philosophical stance of what occurs "after-life" leads me to beleive that if guilt was proven 100%, that is well beyond 'reasonable doubt' to the point of 'no doubt what so ever', that hypothetically my position on the death penalty would shift to 'neutral' rather than my current stance which is 'against'.

With consideration of my philosophiocal stance of what code of 'morality' I think is the "best", my 'against the death penalty' stance would not change what so ever in light of 100% evidence of guilt.

With consideration that I weigh my philosophical stances towards what happens 'before death' with greater importance than those that occur 'after life' my stance on the death penalty would remain 'against' in any circumstance.


I would rather debate the ethics of executing retarded people and people who commited capital crimes as minors. These peripheral issues are more important to me than the greater death penalty debate.